# The New Republic taken in again? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 22, 2007, 8:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republic-taken-in-again/416553 "2007-08-22T20:42:12Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2007, 12:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republic-taken-in-again/416553/21 "2007-08-23T12:27:52Z")
[QUOTE=Hentor the Barbarian] I’ve been trying to recall which blogger predicted exactly what would happen here: some small detail in one of Beauchamp’s accounts would turn out to be inaccurate, and the Red Staters would immediately have placards and marching orders to spread the word that he had been completely debunked. It may have been Kevin Drum or Atrios. [/QUOTE] [Kevin Drum, July 26, 2007](http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2007_07/011753.php): > [@](#): > > Like a Kabuki story, though, you can already see how this is going to play out. Not only will Thomas’s character be dragged savagely through the mud (Michelle Malkin is leading the charge over at her site), but eventually some small part of Thomas’s account will turn out to be slightly exaggerated and the right will erupt in righteous fervor. They were right all along! Thomas did make up his stories! The left does hate the troops! The war is going swimmingly! At least, it would be if the MSM weren’t undermining it at every turn. > > Etc. etc. It’s almost like we don’t even have to bother with real life anymore. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2007, 12:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republic-taken-in-again/416553/22 "2007-08-23T12:37:19Z")
[QUOTE=Mr. Moto] Large infractions should be reported up the chain of command, not to someone’s editor in Washington, DC. [/QUOTE] I think you are correct. These kinds of infractions should not be used for anyone’s benefit. Rather like Kerry waiting until he was safely back in the States before making his claim that he witnessed war crimes in Viet Nam on a daily basis. I grant you, he only spent a few months in Viet Nam, but if he really witnessed this, and wanted to make a difference for the better instead of self-aggrandization, he should have reported the alleged crimes to his superiors. Someone as supposedly brave as he claimed to be should not have been fearful of following the proper chain. Same with this Beauchamp guy. The fact that he made these claims in his wife’s magazine instead of to his superior officer tends to indicate that he has an agenda other than trying to put an end to genuine abuse. Obviously the Usual Suspects are going to go off in spasms of denial and increasingly desperate attempts to change the subject, but that is always going to happen. See [Berger, Sandy](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=267284&highlight=Berger) for SOP in cases like this. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Blalron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/35a633/32.png) [@Blalron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blalron)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2007, 12:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republic-taken-in-again/416553/23 "2007-08-23T12:46:03Z")
[QUOTE=Mr. Moto] Probably both. Soldiers watch out for each other on small infractions, and a certain amount of “extra military instruction” (this is what we called it in the Navy) is often applied when small infractions are noticed by a soldier’s immediate superiors. Thus discipline is applied without a black mark landing on someone’s record. Large infractions should be reported up the chain of command, not to someone’s editor in Washington, DC. [/QUOTE] I’d prefer the public, the taxpayers who are financing this fiasco, have access to all the facts about what kind of conduct our soldiers are up to. Sweeping things under the rug does not contribue towards a healthy debate on our Iraq strategy. ---
**Author:** ![Blalron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/35a633/32.png) [@Blalron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blalron)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2007, 12:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republic-taken-in-again/416553/24 "2007-08-23T12:51:44Z")
[QUOTE=Shodan] Rather like Kerry waiting until he was safely back in the States before making his claim that he witnessed war crimes in Viet Nam on a daily basis. I grant you, he only spent a few months in Viet Nam, but if he really witnessed this, and wanted to make a difference for the better instead of self-aggrandization, he should have reported the alleged crimes to his superiors. Someone as supposedly brave as he claimed to be should not have been fearful of following the proper chain. [/QUOTE] I wish I had the same faith as you in the ability of the “chain of command” to properly redress wrongs. But let me pose a hypothetical to you. What if it’s the official policy of the United States government to commit war crimes? Who do you report to? ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2007, 1:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republic-taken-in-again/416553/25 "2007-08-23T13:04:48Z")
[QUOTE=Blalron] I wish I had the same faith as you in the ability of the “chain of command” to properly redress wrongs. But let me pose a hypothetical to you. What if it’s the official policy of the United States government to commit war crimes? Who do you report to? [/QUOTE] If it’s “official policy”, then it is hardly a secret that needs to be reported in The New Republic. I would recommend running for President. If you lose, then you know that your opinion is not shared by a majority of the electorate. Of course, that would not excuse you from questions about why you went along with the official policy if you thought it was wrong. A hypocrite is a hypocrite, especially if he waits until he is safely in-country before making allegations. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2007, 1:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republic-taken-in-again/416553/26 "2007-08-23T13:26:39Z")
Here’s a Wikipedia [discussion](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Thomas_Beauchamp_controversy) of the controversy. Perhaps this thread should be “ **Bricker** and the righties taken in _yet_ again.” **Mr. Moto** , what do you think the chain of command is going to do with reports of mocking a disfigured woman, wearing a skull on one’s head and running over dogs? I’m hardly expert, but my guess is that when they are dealing with reports of rapes and murders of civilians, these kind of acts would go about as far up the chain of command as you could piss up a tree. And Beauchamp’s stories are not so much about narking out others as they are about describing the dehumanizing experience of the guys over there, since he includes himself and his lack of emotional response in many of the anecdotes. How many times did you, in the Navy, come across the skulls of children or disfigured Afghan women? Perhaps the chain of command would work just fine for the types of infractions that you came across, but might be differentially responsive in other contexts. I don’t know. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2007, 1:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republic-taken-in-again/416553/27 "2007-08-23T13:38:31Z")
[QUOTE=Blalron] I wish I had the same faith as you in the ability of the “chain of command” to properly redress wrongs. But let me pose a hypothetical to you. What if it’s the official policy of the United States government to commit war crimes? Who do you report to? [/QUOTE] It is not the official policy of the government to commit war crimes. Doing so violates military law and is a violation of our treaty obligations, so yours is a hypothetical not based in fact. If a soldier is ordered to commit a crime, he is obligated to refuse to follow that order. If a soldier has an issue of any kind, it must be brought up the chain of command. At any time, if a soldier receives an unsatisfactory answer from one of his superiors, he has the right to jump the chain - taking his complaint to a flag officer, for example, or an ombudsman of some sort, or even a congressional representative. Protocol dictates that a soldier doing this notify the chain of command that he is speaking to outside agencies, so that they are prepared to answer any questions raised and help resolve the problem. The press has a vital role to play in all of this, but I don’t see how one person can simultaneously be a soldier and report for a magazine. (Let’s leave aside the necessary role of military public affairs, which is not journalism of this type.) The jobs are incompatible with each other to such a degree that one cannot be a good soldier and an honest journalist at the same time. It can’t be done. One job will inevitably compromise the other, and that individual will end up trusted by no one. Like Scott Thomas Beauchamp. That is the real story here, and it has been lost in the shouting match between two magazines with agendas of their own. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2007, 2:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republic-taken-in-again/416553/28 "2007-08-23T14:10:08Z")
[QUOTE=Hentor the Barbarian] **Mr. Moto** , what do you think the chain of command is going to do with reports of mocking a disfigured woman, wearing a skull on one’s head and running over dogs? I’m hardly expert, but my guess is that when they are dealing with reports of rapes and murders of civilians, these kind of acts would go about as far up the chain of command as you could piss up a tree. [/QUOTE] Does your police department refuse to hand out speeding tickets because there are murders across town? The chain of command has to enforce discipline, and it handles different soldiers in different ways. At my command, some guys would be going to court-martial, some to captain’s mast, and I had to stay after work a time or two to take care of something I screwed up. That’s as it should be. And you are right, some things don’t get far up the chain - small infractions should be handled by chiefs and sergeants. They are a vital part of the chain, and if they don’t handle those small infractions and let them come to the attentions of their devision or company heads, they aren’t doing their job. [QUOTE=Hentor the Barbarian] And Beauchamp’s stories are not so much about narking out others as they are about describing the dehumanizing experience of the guys over there, since he includes himself and his lack of emotional response in many of the anecdotes. [/QUOTE] I said as much in my opening remarks in this thread. The problem is that he wrote about these things in near real time without letting his chain of command know that there were problems. The Army then had an obligation to follow up on reports of the breaches of discipline that were noted, especially since they were now public. Please see what I wrote about the jobs of soldier and journalist not being compatible in the same individual at the same time. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2007, 2:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republic-taken-in-again/416553/29 "2007-08-23T14:31:01Z")
[QUOTE=treis] Does the GD forum include one of these threads? [/QUOTE] I thought the GD forum included each and every one of those threads. But it turns out I have been smoking something too potent for me, it seems: Commentator says W should make himself president-for-life, & colonize Iraq – Pit Petraeus report will actually be written by the White House – GD Diebold deletes Diebold-critical material from Wikipedia – Pit What a difference a decade makes…Cheney’s assessment of invading Iraq – GD Newsweek’ cover story exposes well-funded global-warming denial machine – GD Bush’s War Czar says the draft is on the table – GD One-third of my examples were actually Pit threads… and they were the one-third most supportive of my position. I have, I think, somewhat conflated the Pit and GD in my impressions of things and this has unfairly colored my impression of this issue. My mistake. Still, there’s something to what I say, if not quite as solid as I thought it was. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2007, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republic-taken-in-again/416553/30 "2007-08-23T15:10:41Z")
[QUOTE=Mr. Moto] Does your police department refuse to hand out speeding tickets because there are murders across town? [/quote] No, but I don’t call 911 when I see a speeder, either. I might write a letter to Dr. Gridlock complaining about the people driving 80 mph on Route 4, but I wouldn’t call the cops. Or, working in the headquarters of a government bureaucracy that does field operations, we occasionally do field observation reports. When we do them, we don’t point out to those we observe, “you’re doing X, Y, and Z wrong,” because the goal of observations isn’t to correct the individual errors, but to get a sense of how well or poorly the reality of the field operations matches up with how we planned them to work, so we can plan better next time. And that’s how I interpret Beauchamp. He’s writing not about exceptional events, but about his experience of the everyday fabric of life for soldiers in a war zone. There’s little point in his reporting to his superior a few instances of the sort of thing that goes on all the time. First, it would be like trying to empty the sea with a thimble; second, his immediate superior also surely knows what goes on all the time, what is exceptional, and hence what’s worth acting on and what isn’t. It’s like the cop who doesn’t bother ticketing people who are driving 58 in a 55 zone, even if his radar is good enough to be 99.9% sure that they were going over 55, because he’d be busy full-time just stopping people who go over 75, or who recklessly tailgate, and stuff like that. All he’d likely do by reporting the ‘goes on all the time’ stuff is annoy the hell out of his superiors; I suspect they’ve got their hands full already, just with fighting a war and all. Finally, his whole point is to let his ultimate bosses - we, the people - know what we’re responsible for. Maybe it’s not in his job description, but assuming he’s providing a reasonably accurate account, it’s something we ought to be glad he’s doing. This is a part of the picture we need: we can’t fully understand exceptional events like Abu Ghraib unless we have a good picture of the day-to-day reality as well. > [@](#): > > And you are right, some things don’t get far up the chain - small infractions should be handled by chiefs and sergeants. They are a vital part of the chain, and if they don’t handle those small infractions and let them come to the attentions of their devision or company heads, they aren’t doing their job. What this comes down to, IMHO, is the limits of human capacity. There are only 24 hours in a day, and some sleep every now and then takes up part of that. Most of it, for Beauchamp’s immediate superiors, is taken up with the everyday mechanics of fighting a war. We have [an exhausted, overburdened Army](http://observer.guardian.co.uk/print/0,,330553669-119093,00.html), not one that has much spare time and energy for dealing with stuff they don’t really _have_ to deal with: > [@](#): > > Lieutenant Clay Hanna looks sick and white. Like his colleagues he does not seem to sleep. Hanna says he catches up by napping on a cot between operations in the command centre, amid the noise of radio. He is up at 6am and tries to go to sleep by 2am or 3am. But there are operations to go on, planning to be done and after-action reports that need to be written. And war interposes its own deadly agenda that requires his attention and wakes him up. > > When he emerges from his naps there is something old and paper-thin about his skin, something sketchy about his movements as the days go by. > > The Americans he commands, like the other men at Sullivan - a combat outpost in Zafraniya, south east Baghdad - hit their cots when they get in from operations. But even when they wake up there is something tired and groggy about them. They are on duty for five days at a time and off for two days. When they get back to the forward operating base, they do their laundry and sleep and count the days until they will get home. It is an exhaustion that accumulates over the patrols and the rotations, over the multiple deployments, until it all joins up, wiping out any memory of leave or time at home. Until life is nothing but Iraq. > > Hanna and his men are not alone in being tired most of the time. A whole army is exhausted and worn out. You see the young soldiers washed up like driftwood at Baghdad’s international airport, waiting to go on leave or returning to their units, sleeping on their body armour on floors and in the dust. > > Where once the war in Iraq was defined in conversations with these men by untenable ideas - bringing democracy or defeating al-Qaeda - these days the war in Iraq is defined by different ways of expressing the idea of being weary. It is a theme that is endlessly reiterated as you travel around Iraq. ‘The army is worn out. We are just keeping people in theatre who are exhausted,’ says a soldier working for the US army public affairs office who is supposed to be telling me how well things have been going since the ‘surge’ in Baghdad began. > > They are not supposed to talk like this. We are driving and another of the public affairs team adds bitterly: ‘We should just be allowed to tell the media what is happening here. Let them know that people are worn out. So that their families know back home. But it’s like we’ve become no more than numbers now.’ You and I in our air-conditioned offices have time and energy to deal with the small stuff. But IMHO, there’s a limit to how much of that we can expect from this army in this war. I think you are being totally unrealistic in your expectations. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2007, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republic-taken-in-again/416553/31 "2007-08-23T15:17:54Z")
[QUOTE=RTFirefly] Finally, his whole point is to let his ultimate bosses - we, the people - know what we’re responsible for. [/QUOTE] I think this is the most important point and one that seems not to get through to a lot of people. We are the superiors of the military. We are the superiors of the president and every person in the chain of command and every individual soldier. No, we don’t get to give them direct orders, but we have an _absolute_ right to know what they are doing in our names. If soldiers don’t want to be embarrassed when the public hears about shit they’re doing while wearing the public’s uniform and carrying the public’s arms, then they shouldn’t be doing that shit. They should have absolutely no expectation that their colleagues or their superiors are going to keep things quiet to help save face. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2007, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republic-taken-in-again/416553/32 "2007-08-23T15:38:45Z")
[QUOTE=acsenray] I think this is the most important point and one that seems not to get through to a lot of people. We are the superiors of the military. We are the superiors of the president and every person in the chain of command and every individual soldier. No, we don’t get to give them direct orders, but we have an _absolute_ right to know what they are doing in our names. If soldiers don’t want to be embarrassed when the public hears about shit they’re doing while wearing the public’s uniform and carrying the public’s arms, then they shouldn’t be doing that shit. They should have absolutely no expectation that their colleagues or their superiors are going to keep things quiet to help save face. [/QUOTE] I agree with that. But that doesn’t mean that Scott Beauchamp ought to be the reporter of this, or that he becomes a better soldier by doing so. There is a thing called unit cohesion, and you screw with it at your peril, especially in a combat zone. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2007, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republic-taken-in-again/416553/33 "2007-08-23T15:58:33Z")
[QUOTE=Mr. Moto] I agree with that. But that doesn’t mean that Scott Beauchamp ought to be the reporter of this, or that he becomes a better soldier by doing so. There is a thing called unit cohesion, and you screw with it at your peril, especially in a combat zone. [/QUOTE] Then maybe the wingnuts shoulda kept their mouths shut, rather than demanding proof that “Scott Thomas” was a real person. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2007, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republic-taken-in-again/416553/34 "2007-08-23T16:01:43Z")
There’s also the problem that in the unlikely event that the military was going to authorize a combat soldier to publish such accounts to begin with, that very authorization would’ve undermined the credibility of the soldier’s accounts. We needed this sort of account from _somebody_. And in the wake of his revealing his identity, the brass has run roughshod over that unit, from the sound of it. Sounds like _they_ could give a good goddamn about unit cohesion, relative to bad PR. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2007, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republic-taken-in-again/416553/35 "2007-08-23T16:15:01Z")
[QUOTE=Hentor the Barbarian] Here’s a Wikipedia [discussion](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Thomas_Beauchamp_controversy) of the controversy. Perhaps this thread should be “ **Bricker** and the righties taken in _yet_ again.” [/QUOTE] Wikipedia should never be used a source of authority for a hotly debated political topic-- especially one that is currently unfolding. Note the disclaimer at the top of the article you linked to: > [@](#): > > This page is currently protected from editing until August 29, 2007 (UTC) or until disputes have been resolved. > Protection is not an endorsement of the current version (protection log). Please discuss changes on the talk page or request unprotection. You may use {{editprotected}} on the talk page to ask for an administrator to make an edit for you. ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2007, 4:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republic-taken-in-again/416553/36 "2007-08-23T16:55:36Z")
[QUOTE=Bricker] I thought the GD forum included each and every one of those threads. But it turns out I have been smoking something too potent for me, it seems: Commentator says W should make himself president-for-life, & colonize Iraq – Pit Petraeus report will actually be written by the White House – GD Diebold deletes Diebold-critical material from Wikipedia – Pit What a difference a decade makes…Cheney’s assessment of invading Iraq – GD Newsweek’ cover story exposes well-funded global-warming denial machine – GD Bush’s War Czar says the draft is on the table – GD One-third of my examples were actually Pit threads… and they were the one-third most supportive of my position. I have, I think, somewhat conflated the Pit and GD in my impressions of things and this has unfairly colored my impression of this issue. My mistake. Still, there’s something to what I say, if not quite as solid as I thought it was. [/QUOTE] You said that it’s not too much of an inferential jump to think that GD would include a thread about a conservative magazine fabricating a story. I’m asking you if there is one. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2007, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republic-taken-in-again/416553/37 "2007-08-23T16:59:38Z")
[QUOTE=RTFirefly] There’s also the problem that in the unlikely event that the military was going to authorize a combat soldier to publish such accounts to begin with, that very authorization would’ve undermined the credibility of the soldier’s accounts. [/QUOTE] Uh huh. But the alternative is a nightmare of operational security violations, perhaps even the disclosure of troop movements or classified data. There is a reason why the military keeps control of communications of this nature from a combat zone. The Army has been struggling with this issue quite a lot lately - witness the on-again off-again bans on MySpace accounts and the like. The threat is real enough. Some months ago someone challenged me to come up with the unit information for LCPL Webb (Senator Webb’s son). I found it is just a few minutes on a site that he maintained. So let’s not pretend that these are minor issues - they’re not. When the Army confiscated the laptop and the cell phone from Beauchamp and forced him to communicate with friends and family through MWR phones that could be monitored, they did so to teach him a lesson in battlefield security. And if he needed to learn it, perhaps some folks here need to learn it as well. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2007, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republic-taken-in-again/416553/38 "2007-08-23T17:01:41Z")
Although I more or less agree with \*\*Bricker \*\*on the merit of this particular story, I do have to admit that it’s hard to drum up interest in debating about whether or not lefties on this board would jump all over a hypothetical thread about some right-wing news source that made up or exaggerated a story. That happens in the Pit all the time, of course, but so what? This board leans left, by American standards. BFD. There are plenty of lefties here that maintain enough objectivity to not see everything through partisan blinders, even if there are many that don’t. And although righties are outnumbered, we see the same thing with that bunch-- some partisan hacks and some objective debaters. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2007, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republic-taken-in-again/416553/39 "2007-08-23T17:16:04Z")
[QUOTE=Mr. Moto] …they did so to teach him a lesson in battlefield security. And if he needed to learn it, perhaps some folks here need to learn it as well. [/QUOTE] Did they? Well, that’s certainly reassuring! Knee-jerk reflexive that I am, I pretty much assumed they did it to shut him up. But I hasten to assure you that such operational details as are revealed to me will remain confidential. Our enemies might stuff an IED up a mongrel’s ass and set him out in the street. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2007, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republic-taken-in-again/416553/40 "2007-08-23T17:22:17Z")
> [@Mr. Moto](#): > > When the Army confiscated the laptop and the cell phone from Beauchamp and forced him to communicate with friends and family through MWR phones that could be monitored, they did so to teach him a lesson in battlefield security. This is based on what, exactly? I will state, with equal authority, that they did it to teach him a lesson about the wisdom of embarrassing an organization that owns your ass 24-7. “Equal authority” meaning none. You’re making bullshit assumptions, and I’m making an equally unfounded claim - but at least I’m doing so just to make that point, and I don’t expect to have mine taken seriously. But if they’re so concerned about communications security, they need to cut off all phone and email contact between soldiers and the homefront. Because ‘teaching a lesson’ after the fact won’t keep the beans from being spilled; you need to keep it from happening in the first place. There’s really no reason at all I can see to believe this is about battlefield information security; you’re just making this up AFAICT. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republic-taken-in-again/416553.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-republic-taken-in-again/416553.md?page=3)