"The U.S. Army has ordered soldiers to stop posting to blogs or sending personal e-mail messages, without first clearing the content with a superior officer, Wired News has learned. The directive, issued April 19, is the sharpest restriction on troops' online activities since the start of the Iraq war. And it could mean the end of military blogs, observers say."


They fight and die for the right for us to be on this site, but have no rights of their own.

That's nuts!

Makes sense if you think about it though. If I were a military commander, I'd be pretty bent if one of the troops under my watch got a bunch of us killed because the enemy got hold of something off of his personal blog and ambushed us somewhere because they knew where we were going to be.

It sucks to lose that right, yes absolutely, but if you think about it, it makes sense.

The military has always reserved the rights to censure the troops personal communications.

Its comes under op sec, operations security.

A soldier, or airman/sailor/Marine gives up a lot of rights so he can protect you.

Where else can you go to jail for not getting a haircut or not wear your clothes properly?

I once sat on a courts martial board for a young sgt, who wasnt wearing his hat. And yes, we convicted him!

This make perfect sense. A military has to be disciplined and controlled. They have no business giving opinions to the world so long as they are in the military.

Censoring the troops keeps hidden their lack of support for the war and nothing else. That way Bush can continue to lie about how the troops love being blown up or shot.

And these restrictions apply when they are at home as well. That's the part I was referring to. In theatre, I agree with the control issues. Out of theatre is a different matter.

Years ago, military personnel would place telephone calls to the U.S. with the help of amateur radio operators. The service person would talk over a two way radio, and a U.S. based amateur radio operator would have his radio patched into the phone system. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_Affiliate_Radio_System

The point of this is that the conversation was being transmitted over shortwave radio without any kind of encryption. All that it would take to listen in to that conversation would be a shortwave radio. I'm sure that in light of this, the military had some restrictions and guidelines concerning what could and couldn't be said over the air. I think that applying the same guidelines to blogs and e-mail would be appropriate. Does anyone on this board know what those guidelines were? (I don't).

The military gives everyone a OP-SEC briefing periodically, and they stress you cant give out any kind of operational info, this also included peacetime operations.

In Vietnam, you wernt allowed to send back, or have in your possession photos showing dead, either ours or theirs.

They never instituted actual censorship, but reserved the right to at any time.

Nwokie, as another Vietnam vet, I have no trouble with censoring operational or tactic information, but a soldier should be allowed to say if he does not support the war or what he does when he is not fighting. I have had friends in Iraq who support the war still write to me about how they reacted when a friend was killed.
Yeah, I know they tried to stop us from bringing home pictures of the dead, but I still got one through of my best friend while he was being treated before he died. I look at him daily now and that is why I want those kids home now.

No one has said they couldnt say they dont like the war, their just requiring that whatever they post, is approved first, there has been a lot of legitimate operations security info posted.

OK, Nwokie, sir, we are on the same page now.

this would be a little easier to swallow if the commander-in-chief wasn't running such a deceptive and secretive adminstration.

This edict came down after Tillman case was blown wide open, and the myth about "Lynch the Heroine" was debunked by her pleas for the truth to be told. Coincidence? I wonder if they will be even harder on contributors to the "Sandbox?"

I have no issue with censorship of active duty personnel on the field of battle when it comes to positions and movements. However, give these men and women some credit, they are not getting their comrades killed. They are being hushed when their comrades are killed.

As far as I know, it is already against the rules to be seen attending any political rallies in uniform. I guess there is the "green backdrop" exception for jingoists, since many candidates have appropriated our military for photo opportunities that are clearly out of bounds.

"This make perfect sense. A military has to be disciplined and controlled. They have no business giving opinions to the world so long as they are in the military."

Why? I'd like that spelled out please.

Tillman's and Lynch's cases arent the same.

Tillamn was a spec 4, with limite4d military experience, but he was older and was better educated than your run of the ill spec 4, and in excellent physical condition.

Because of those traits he became an assistant squad leader. He was given a task to take his group to a position, on the way, he heard gun fire, and decided to go and help his friends. First mistake, additionally he didnt coordinate his moves, 2nd mistake. Finally he approached the combat scene without making his presence known to friendlies, third and biggeswt mistake.

The US forces in the area, that were engaged with the enemy, seeing a new armed force, fired on them. Not a mistake on their part, the hit just exactly what they were shooting at.

In the aftermath, realizing that Spec tillman had done something brave, but dumb, did what the military usually does in that type of case, gave him a medal, and wrote it up that way.

Pvt Lynch case is different, she was riding in a truck, with a convoy that was ambushed, she panicked, and her weapon wouldnt work. She ended up captured, and the military did what they normally do with POWs, treat them as heros, no matter the circumstance, see Sen McCain.
They have a group of medals, that POWs nearly always get, regardless of the circumstances.

In Lynch's case, If I had been in the chain, I would have had the Platoon sgt and 1st sgts rears, because they did not do thir job!

So