• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Pentagon Keeps Trump in the Dark About its Cyber Attacks on Russia

Manc Skipper said:
A rogue element who brays secrets to the Russian ambassador, endangering Israeli field agents. No ally dare trust the USA with secret information, it can cost lives.
Click to expand...

1. Intelligence sharing amongst the allies probably remains pretty high.
2. Randomly sharing intelligence with the Russians because it makes you feel cool is pretty stupid.
3. Trump is the owner of the classification system, and gets to do with it what he wants. By definition he's not a rogue element in this realm, rather, any entity who attempts to act in the manner described in the OP is.
 
cpwill said:
1. Intelligence sharing amongst the allies probably remains pretty high.
2. Randomly sharing intelligence with the Russians because it makes you feel cool is pretty stupid.
3. Trump is the owner of the classification system, and gets to do with it what he wants. By definition he's not a rogue element in this realm, rather, any entity who attempts to act in the manner described in the OP is.
Click to expand...

Bad precedent, to be remembered for future administrations.
 
Lovebug said:
Bad precedent, to be remembered for future administrations.
Click to expand...

Terrible precedent. No matter how much you dislike or don't respect the President, you don't get to detract from the office, nor does it justify seizing for yourself powers and authority you do not have.

Trump fans chant about the Deep State, well, that's not the Deep State, but it's what Deep States can be made from.

If it exists (and, again, it's not that I don't trust the Rolling Stone because they are completely non-credible.... it's just that I don't trust the Rolling Stone, because they are completely non-credible), then it needs to be brutally put down, with careers ended, and clearances yanked.
 
ElChupacabra said:
The more interesting aspect for me is that the military considers him a security risk in leaking information inadvertently. Trump does have a tendency to speak off the cuff, and if there was a feeling this could compromise the work they were doing, then this is more about their risk assessment than anything else. If their concern is potentially leaked information, do you think they should take that risk?
Click to expand...

Yes, I see your point.

However I think the larger point is that basically the military is acting independently of civilian oversight, independent of the legal chain of command. It is effectively controlling foreign policy on its own.
 
Lovebug said:
So you are saying the are keeping it from Trump, but are leaking it to the NYT, and are therefor warning Vlad that an attack is coming.
Does that make sense to anyone?
Click to expand...


That is the thing which does not make sense.

They're doing their part to protect the nation from Russia and from Trump, but they can't be quiet heroes? They need to get some attention and possibly interfere with their goal?

Unless it's part of some bigger plan, that was not cool.


But as something that humans would do ... I do believe it. Whether out of ego or carelessness. Or maybe the NYT journalists are just that good. Supposedly it was the result of a 3 month investigation. Maybe the reporters dug and wheedled and caught someone in a slip and dug some more and got the slip confirmed, and then chose to tell the story. So maybe upsetting the operation is on the NYT. Or maybe what needed to be done is done, and it was deemed that it was time to inform the Russians of the vulnerability and this was considered an acceptable way to do it.
 
apdst said:
That's not a decision any of those people can make. This is a government of the people, by the people and of the people. Trump is the legitimately elected president. This isn't a government of the bureaucracy.
Click to expand...
More than half of The People think Trump is untrustworthy.

Govt is made of people.

So, consequences ensue.

:shrug:
 
Simon W. Moon said:
More than half of The People think Trump is untrustworthy.

Govt is made of people.

So, consequences ensue.

:shrug:
Click to expand...

If their opinion negatively affects how they execute their sworn duty, then they have no business being there. The oath isn't optional.
 
Amelia said:
That is the thing which does not make sense.

They're doing their part to protect the nation from Russia and from Trump, but they can't be quiet heroes? They need to get some attention and possibly interfere with their goal?

Unless it's part of some bigger plan, that was not cool.


But as something that humans would do ... I do believe it. Whether out of ego or carelessness. Or maybe the NYT journalists are just that good. Supposedly it was the result of a 3 month investigation. Maybe the reporters dug and wheedled and caught someone in a slip and dug some more and got the slip confirmed, and then chose to tell the story. So maybe upsetting the operation is on the NYT. Or maybe what needed to be done is done, and it was deemed that it was time to inform the Russians of the vulnerability and this was considered an acceptable way to do it.
Click to expand...

No, they can't, because they don't have the authority to bypass the president's lawful authority. That's literally, treason.
 
Thoreau72 said:
Yes, I see your point.

However I think the larger point is that basically the military is acting independently of civilian oversight, independent of the legal chain of command. It is effectively controlling foreign policy on its own.
Click to expand...

Yeah - it's a lose/lose scenario here.

We shouldn't be doing it at all, but if we are doing it, there must at least be executive oversight.
 
apdst said:
No, they can't, because they don't have the authority to bypass the president's lawful authority. That's literally, treason.
Click to expand...

No, it's a raft of other charges, but it doesn't fit treason.
 
3leftsdoo said:
Yeah - it's a lose/lose scenario here.

We shouldn't be doing it at all, but if we are doing it, there must at least be executive oversight.
Click to expand...

With this clown? He can't keep his mouth shut about anything.
 
Why let him anything when he understands nothing?
 
Thoreau72 said:
Yes, I see your point.

However I think the larger point is that basically the military is acting independently of civilian oversight, independent of the legal chain of command. It is effectively controlling foreign policy on its own.
Click to expand...

A good point. And the word "coup" comes ro mind again.
 
apdst said:
Yeah, that's what we need: the military operating on it's own, creating it's own authority.

Only Leftists would see this as a good idea.
Click to expand...

You mean us unpatriotic leftists? You never miss an opportunity to blame the dreaded libs for everything. We, the leftists if left to our own desires would decrease the military budget. Its overbloated. It does however say a lot that the pentagon doesn't trust the commander in chief to not leak our military intentions.
 
bongsaway said:
You mean us unpatriotic leftists? You never miss an opportunity to blame the dreaded libs for everything. We, the leftists if left to our own desires would decrease the military budget. Its overbloated. It does however say a lot that the pentagon doesn't trust the commander in chief to not leak our military intentions.
Click to expand...

And you would weaken our armed forces to the point where you would be begging a foreign power to invade.

It does however say a lot that the pentagon doesn't trust the commander in chief
Click to expand...

You're right. It says there are some officers in the Pentagon that are a ****ing disgrace to the uniform and the service.
 
3leftsdoo said:
Yeah - it's a lose/lose scenario here.

We shouldn't be doing it at all, but if we are doing it, there must at least be executive oversight.
Click to expand...

The Beavis and Butthead duo of Bolton and Trump will protect us, I'm sure. ;)
 
bongsaway said:
You mean us unpatriotic leftists? You never miss an opportunity to blame the dreaded libs for everything. We, the leftists if left to our own desires would decrease the military budget. Its overbloated. It does however say a lot that the pentagon doesn't trust the commander in chief to not leak our military intentions.
Click to expand...


What is that about?? I said nothing about lefties patriotic or ouerwise - guilty conscience???

I don't believe it is "the pentgon" under discussion. I believe it is certain individuals much like those in the WH a while ago who saw it as their job to stop the Prsident from doing his job.
 
cpwill said:
Not that I don't trust the Rolling Stone not to be completely wrong about pitching a politically explosive story, but.....


I don't trust the Rolling Stone not to be completely wrong about pitching a politically explosive story..
Click to expand...

Not to mention the absurdity of someone in the Pentagon claiming not wanting Trump to know, while they leak it to the NY Times. Trump is the one who authorized the countermeasures after Obama had told them to stand down.
 
The Mark said:
If I were involved in intelligence, for damned sure I wouldn't brief anyone in the Trump administration, especially if the information would put my assets at risk - unless there was good reason to expect they'd keep quiet about whatever they were briefed on - which Trump is incapable of doing.

Not to mention the sieve-like nature of his staff.
Click to expand...

You would of thought they would of gone through the same thought process before giving the information they thought Trump might reveal, to the New York Times who in fact did reveal the information. .
 
dixon01767 said:
You would of thought they would of gone through the same thought process before giving the information they thought Trump might reveal, to the New York Times who in fact did reveal the information. .
Click to expand...

What's done is done (code implants). It's not like the NSA or Cyber Command can remove what is already in place simply because Trump demands it.

Trump has already met secretly with Vladimir Putin 5 times without US witnesses present (or he confiscated the translator's notes). He will be meeting Putin again shortly (28th and 29th of June) in Japan.

When it comes to the Kremlin this president, with his Moscow Trump Tower dreams, simply cannot be trusted. He brought this on himself.
 
Rogue Valley said:
What's done is done (code implants). It's not like the NSA or Cyber Command can remove what is already in place simply because Trump demands it.
Click to expand...

???? You mean they cant unleak, what they have already leaked.

Rogue Valley said:
Trump has already met secretly with Vladimir Putin 5 times without US witnesses present (or he confiscated the translator's notes). He will be meeting Putin again shortly (28th and 29th of June) in Japan.

When it comes to the Kremlin this president, with his Moscow Trump Tower dreams, simply cannot be trusted. He brought this on himself.
Click to expand...

What silliness.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom