Now that I've had a chance to think about it - I think it brings about a good opportunity to discuss what was at the heart of LTC Yingling's argument - do we understand the fight we are in and are we adapting/innovating/organizing/promoting/assigning/equipping/educating to be successful? When you look at this it sounds allot like the 2 up 1 back, platoon in reserve, pre-planned targets MTC at the NTC / Defense from the BP of the 1990s and while that and information security of sensitive information which may cost success and lives are very important, they are not a sole substitute for developing skills and capabilities needed to prosecute this war and gain and maintain the initiative?
This sounds allot more like a Super FOB IO strategy. We'll build these walls around us and communicate only on approved internal lines of communication with internal approval of approved internal discussions so that we can ensure we are discussing approved questions with approved solutions which we will then dissiminate at approved CTC and publications. The latency will be huge! The timeliness of useful information which can be placed in the correct context so that it can be applied will be largely neutralized. But we will be safe.
OK - this may not have been the intent - but that may not matter if someone does not clarify the directive - remember perceptions are reality.
I'd argue that while the enemy is prosecuting a very effective IO campaign and use of the Internet, we are tightening the chastity belt for fear of misuse. There probably has been some screw ups - but how do you measure the subjective value vs. risk? We are a quantitative bunch at heart facing a foe who is wlling to be subjective. Are we fighting the fight we have or wishing for the one we'd like? Is developinga real information warfare capability vs a better bank vault beyond us? I know people who sit on information for total fear they will be held accountable for its release - they are largely inneffective, but they are safe. They are not concerned about the mission any where near as much as they are self preservation andwill often use it as an excuse for lethargic behavior.
While the risks must be known and mitigated / minimized, don't assume the enemy will operate under any restrictions. How much terrain does a defensive position control - only what it can see and reach - and these days that is very limitied given that the key terrain is Human.
\
Oh - did I mention AKO has retooled its email - again like so many things- form over function.
Bookmarks