Re:White House says it's 'case closed' on the Signal group c...
by ty6853 on Tuesday April 01, 2025 @09:50AM
(#43546773)
Their extraordinarily rare shoot down have not served as a defense against our bombing campaigns. It is operationally meaningless.
Re:White House says it's 'case closed' on the Signal group c...
by Arnt on Tuesday April 01, 2025 @01:17PM
(#43549269)
I think that is correct, but how can defense against a meaningless campaign be meaningful?
Perhaps you can explain the operational meaning of the bombing campaign.
Re:White House says it's 'case closed' on the Signal group c...
by adammarples on Tuesday April 01, 2025 @04:08PM
(#43550824)
It's not an adequate defence but you should concede that a serious military do not actually want their best pilots and multilmillion dollar war fighting planes shot down? It is at the very least embarrassing.
Re:White House says it's 'case closed' on the Signal group c...
by sorcerer-mar on Tuesday April 01, 2025 @08:52AM
(#43546206)
And not using expiring messages on Signal is important also for record retention requirements.
https://www.defensenews.com/news/your-military/2024/09/16/ho...
So opesec, against all enemies, is important. Not just for diplomatic and political reasons. For OPERATIONAL (the op in opsec) reasons.