The end of NATO?

[robav8r]

Interesting opinion here . . .

 

[JTS11]

Interesting opinion here . . .

That is interesting, bc he's a big player in the bro culture (I do like some Barstool stuff). I think it points to a few ppl getting fired. Maybe waiting on the Joe Rogan input, I guess.

 

[Faded Float Coat]

Interesting opinion here . . .

Couple of thoughts:

1. Broken clocks are right twice a day. Kudos to Dave.

2. Dave seems to anchor on the addition of Goldberg as the real problem. What he, and many many others are missing is how insanely stupid it was that the chat ever existed outside of an appropriate medium or facility.

3. The electoral age and gender gaps diverging at an ever increasing pace is perfectly explained by the fact that this guy is providing national security takes to 3.6M followers. No need to what-about John Oliver or some equivalent - also not great.

4. Was Dave demonstrating an acceptable or unacceptable level of moral outrage? Asking for a friend...

 

[taxi1]

Hegseth in a hotdog costume

 

[DBM]

I appreciate the entertainment uncs

 

[Yardstick]

I’ve seen more outrage here than I remember seeing after the Biden botched Afghanistan withdrawal. If hegseth and waltz wanted to avoid the criticism they should’ve killed 13 us servicemen from negligence, given the taliban $80 billion in supplies and then drone striked an innocent family while calling it a righteous strike

 

[ea6bflyr]

I’ve seen more outrage here than I remember seeing after the Biden botched Afghanistan withdrawal. If hegseth and waltz wanted to avoid the criticism they should’ve killed 13 us servicemen from negligence, given the taliban $80 billion in supplies and then drone striked an innocent family while calling it a righteous strike

Ah, nice “what about“ post again. I guess you don’t want to discuss the current topic at hand?

Unless you are a history professor, let’s talk about 2025, m’kay?

 

[taxi1]

 

[Faded Float Coat]

I’ve seen more outrage here than I remember seeing after the Biden botched Afghanistan withdrawal. If hegseth and waltz wanted to avoid the criticism they should’ve killed 13 us servicemen from negligence, given the taliban $80 billion in supplies and then drone striked an innocent family while calling it a righteous strike

Today is Wednesday, and Saturday will come after Friday. See how that works? Two related but different things being true at the same time.

 

[Brett327]

If we're adhering to the actual definitions of 'grave / serious / normal damage to national security

Let's adhere to what the SCG says so that you don't have to break any bones while hand waiving so vigorously. Jesus Fucking Christ. You people are absolutely insane in your excuse-making.

 

[Brett327]

Jesus Christ this thread is a shit show. In the past three pages alone, I've seen:

1.) Four separate definitions of national security ("normal damage to national security"?? What in the goddamn double deep-fried fuck does that mean?)

2.) Gymnastics of a staggering degree to hand-wave a clear violation that would have easily had any of us in deep shit on active-duty with zero argument from anyone over the significance.

3.) Inane comparison of the Yemen war plans being sent via Signal to a.) the B2 spirit's RCS and b.) A CO violating shipboard liberty policy. WTF, again. You sure you don't want to set the guardrails any wider than that?

4.) The naive assumption that the Houthis were the only ones that could possibly benefit from advance knowledge of the raid. Fortunately, others have pointed out the clear fallacy of that argument.


You all need to check your bearings. We used to give a shit about security, and phrases like OPSEC and "loose lips sink ships" meant something. Now, it seems to have gone fucking partisan like every other goddamned thing. We all know SECDEF isn't getting fired over this. But don't minimize and be an apologist for what was not only remarkably bad judgment, but an explicit and willful violation of DoD security policy.

This is spot on. Some of you should lose your clearances based on what has been posted here, and should probably resign your commissions. Absolutely shameful.

 

[Spekkio]

Let's adhere to what the SCG says so that you don't have to break any bones while hand waiving so vigorously. Jesus Fucking Christ. You people are absolutely insane in your excuse-making.

I like how you're attributing opinions to me that don't exist just because I'm trying to remain logical or analytical about the whole thing. Emotions got us sucked into Iraq.

I'm reminded of a congressional staffer who told me over drinks: Americans love the idea of servicemembers but they don't actually like you (meaning, officers). Sent me for a bit of a recoil, but then I reflected on how we're portrayed in popular media and yeah... it's really bad.

Perhaps the binary way of thinking is why we've (meaning the military as an institution) have mostly been sidelined in every policy decision since WWII.

But sure, let's burn the witch!

I'm glad I'll never have to lie to a crew of 5,000+ people that the reason we're extending a deployment is to protect freedom of navigation and global national security when our leadership made operational decisions based on what messaging is going to look better to voters who "don't know who the Houthis are."

 

[JTS11]

Kind of tldr, but hilarious panel with whataboutism and folks paid by Russians...on Piers Morgan's show.

 

[Faded Float Coat]

Worth keeping in mind that Tim was republican campaign staffer/advisor until 2016. AOC he's not.

 

[JTS11]

Worth keeping in mind that Tim was republican campaign staffer/advisor until 2016. AOC he's not.

This panel is analogous to this thread discussion. Tim blows up Dave Rubin at the end.