During OIF I recieved a load of jpegs from a soldier/fan in the field whose unit had just occupied an Iraqi airbase.  The base itself was a mess and in particular, various munitions were scattered all over the place, some in very poor or partially dismantled condition.

 

Of course, posting the materials and writing about them was one objective, but I did notice a batch of AA-8 Aphid missiles in the piles of junk.  While the Army engineers on site knew of most weapons - they had little knowledge of air to air missiles. 

 

I promptly warned him to isolate these systems and make sure they were disposed of properly.  The Aphids were clearly marked as radioactive.  The Russians built the small air to air missile with depleted uranium warheads in order to give it the extra punch to knock down western aircraft.  Of course, depleted uranium in Russia is defined differently than depleted uranium in the USA.  These warheads were hot - not the kind of stuff to be circulating in post invasion Iraq.

 

The Army ordinance disposal unit on site contacted their USAF counterparts - who confirmed my frantic emails.  In the end, the missiles were shipped out, dismantled and disposed of.

 

Thus, despite the nature of the efforts to limit troop contact via the internet - I know from experience it can pay off, save lives and even provide invaluable information to the home front and the soldiers in the field.

--

While the monitoring of Internet activity is not truly practical, it would be well if the official policies of explicitly permitting personnel to engage in such communications were accompanied by a straightforward body of recommendations to increase the effectiveness and professionalism of such activities.

 

Even the silliest "Skippy" in today's military wants to be respected for his/her knowledge, skills, intelligence, and sense of personal honor.  There's also the fact that online materials associated with a particular individual's identity are "out there" forever, and young soldiers, airmen, sailors and Marines should be advised that even if regulations don't forbid them from posting a great many things, the Real World might very well bite them pretty damned badly for personal indiscretions.

 

Above all, it should be emphasized in policy that today's enlisted personnel and officers are volunteers, pledged to higher standards of integrity and self-responsibility than the conscript shambles of previous generations. If for no other reason than self-respect - and respect for their fellow volunteers - military servicemen on active duty should behave online with the same conscientiousness they would display when in uniform walking down the street in their home towns.

 

--

The disagreement is over more than how to deal with the Internet.  It is also over how, or even if,  Soldiers should tell their stories to the American people.  Secretary Gates proclaims that the press is not the enemy, and Public Affairs seeks to control any dialog Soldiers might have with the people through their channels to be disseminated by the MSM.  If you can't beat'em, join 'em.

 

Muddy Boots IO is the distributed, Strategic Corporal talking directly to the people, bypassing PA and the MSM and influencing their emotions, motives, objective reasoning, and ultimately the behavior of American  politicians, organizations, groups, and individuals.

 

Some powerful people do not want to be bypassed.  Others don't think Soldiers should be allowed to communicate anything that might bolster national will to continue a war they oppose.

The best control to impose over the troops and the internet is to frequently remind them that:

-   One posted, nothing can be withdrawn or changed (you can try, but someone will have a backup).

-   Anything that that they post can and will be used against them in a court of law, and maybe in ways that they did not think possible.

 

There's a whole new world of self incrimination out there.