Skip to main content

What?  We can't know who we are at war with?  Why?

“Because elements that might be considered ‘associated forces’ can build credibility by being listed as such by the United States, we have classified the list"

Really?  Again, what's the reason for keeping who we are at war with a classified secret?

“We cannot afford to inflate these organizations that rely on violent extremist ideology to strengthen their ranks.”
I'm not so sure having a Classified List of who the US sees themselves at war with might not be counterproductive.  

Using an emotionally deprived child in the classroom as an example, could terror group wannabe's escalate their violent behavior to get more attention?

Jack Goldsmith, a professor at Harvard Law who served as a legal counsel during the Bush administration and has written on this question at length, told ProPublica that the Pentagon’s reasoning for keeping the affiliates secret seems weak.

“If the organizations are ‘inflated’ enough to be targeted with military force, why cannot they be mentioned publicly?” Goldsmith said.

He added that there is “a countervailing very important interest in the public knowing who the government is fighting against in its name."

Wait.  This is the same Jack Goldsmith that helped John Yoo craft the Torture Memos.

Propublica is touted as a liberal news source.  Wonder why they would chose to include Goldsmith's opinion?

Ok, what's going on?  It feels like DoD is setting Obama up in oh so many ways.  

NSA reports to DoD as well.

What if

What if the neocons are setting Obama up, time and time again?

Or, what if Obama lacks discernment when given information by an emphatic authoritarian type, like Generals and/or Cyber Quants?  

Or, out of fear of making mistakes that might cause a loss of innocent American lives, Obama doesn't question DoD and/or Cyber Quants?

What if the dark cabal has promised Obama and his family high ranks and security for life?

As I have watched this president, who like you worked very hard to elect in 2008 and 2012, I can't seem to wrap my head around so many things that are happening on his watch.

I am beginning to believe he is either being set up or that he was a closet neocon all along.  

I prefer to believe he is being set up.

I have been trying to help warn people that the Libertarian $$ men, the Koch Brothers and their swarm of rich men and women, are spreading so much disinformation it is mind boggling.  At the rate they are going, and with new secrecy information surfacing at a fire hose pace, who will be left to have any faith in government, or worse, Democrats?

Even this community is losing faith in Obama lately.

Are we also subject to disinformation or were we truly fooled in 2008?

For example, here's an article from one of the many Libertarian/TeaParty/BirchSociety news sources:
Read Obama's Entire Speech Defending NSA Spying

This is from reason.com whose by-line is"  Free Minds and Free Markets

You would be hard pressed to find a more Libertarian phrase!

And the Wall Street Journal is laying NSA at Obama's feet, as though he invented NSA.

From the research I have done, NSA surveillance began with Reagan and sadly escalated thereafter.  The culmination of decades of development, all sanctioned by the varing Congressional sessions, simply landed at Obama's feet.  He is the last man standing in the NSA musical chair game when the development music stopped, and the zygliogyroinfinity-bite NSA centers power up.  (I made up the zyg... word)

What if......................?

Do you have a "what if" question to help explain Obama's actions, or lack thereof?

Here's a couple:

What if his family was threatened by some dark cabal as he took office?

Remember those "We'll televise the health reform roundtables" promises?  There was one televised event.  At the time, when no more appeared, I thought to myself "Someone kaboshed that promise" and saw Obama saying "We HAVE to have at least one!  I promised".  The dark cabal said "OK, just one"

OR

What if Obama fooled us all and he is a neoconservative?

What if............?

What possible real reason can there be to keep the names of

WHO WE ARE AT WAR WITH

a secret?

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  One really bad effect (9+ / 0-)

    It is, I believe, against the law to provide "material support" for any of the entities on that list.

    Nobody can tell whether they're breaking the law as long as the list is classified.

    Freedom isn't free. Patriots pay taxes.

    by Dogs are fuzzy on Sat Jul 27, 2013 at 02:41:32 PM PDT

  •  OMG...does the enemy know we are (7+ / 0-)

    at war?   A war that lives up to your screename.  A classified war..REALLY !!!  So classified we are paying for WHAT?  
    Well I guess we are paying for a war on us..but who knows...it's classified.

    We the People have to make a difference and the Change.....Just do it ! Be part of helping us build a veteran community online. United Veterans of America

    by Vetwife on Sat Jul 27, 2013 at 02:43:11 PM PDT

  •  So we haven't always been at war with eastasia (11+ / 0-)

    after all.

    We've always been at war with X.

    When you triangulate everything, you can't even roll downhill...

    by PhilJD on Sat Jul 27, 2013 at 02:44:51 PM PDT

    •  Actually, (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      PhilJD, aliasalias, Cassiodorus

      we are at war with (                       )

      Either fill in the blank or To Be Announced.

      Just for fun

      Read through the DARPA Budget sometime.

      Just Google

      "Budget estimates" darpa

      These are searchable PDF files.

      It's difficult to be happy knowing so many suffer. We must unite.

      by War on Error on Sat Jul 27, 2013 at 02:49:38 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Anyone who still believes that they were born in (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        War on Error

        a place where there is or even is supposed to be Freeeedom (tm) and LI-berty (tm) and Justice for All (sic, so very very sic), and that warm, fuzzy or grim glow that they feel when they hear the word "democracy" has a goddam thing to do with what the economic engines and energies of this place are actually about, needs a course in remedial reading of history and current events. If you can filter out the propaganda and fraud.

        Obama is an international man of mystery. Is he a Good Man caught up in events beyond his control and against his will? Or as has often happened in the past, read up on Popes and Roman emperors for many examples, is he a SMALL man who, when presented with an opportunity to truly RULE, actually did so?

        Thought experiment: Imagine, if you can, Martin Luther King elected to the presidency... Would the current situation be what it is?

        One wonders when the folks, the ones that maybe more people here are beginning to maybe see actually run things, will feel that they have a sufficient chokehold on all the points that matter, to the point that they can cut off the little bit of air and noise that still is allowed to escape the throats of spots like dkos. It ain't like the pattern is not somewhat and becoming ever more obvious.

        Hope all the people that still beleeeeeve that voting matters, on the large scale and for the long haul, the people who by playing at hardball politics and getting out the vote and going to the polls and arguing so earnestly about their issues and about "policies" over which in all earnestness they have zero impact or control, who lend the all-important minimal legitimacy to the "government" by participating in the masque of elections, will not suffer too much for their beliefs.

        "Is that all there is?" Peggy Lee.

        by jm214 on Sat Jul 27, 2013 at 03:51:43 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Not participating would be a big mistake (0+ / 0-)

          on many levels.  Not the least of which is having to look at one's self in the mirror.

          I may not win, but I will be able to look in the mirror and say "I fought a good fight."

          GOTV in 2014 with a hope and prayer we find some good non-corporate, non-CFR, non-Bankster affiliated candidates.

          I'm all for picking names at random from a hat for each town, then from each county, then from each state to choose 600 people or how many it takes to replace all the politicians in DC.

          It's difficult to be happy knowing so many suffer. We must unite.

          by War on Error on Sat Jul 27, 2013 at 03:58:32 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Tenets of neoconservatism (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      aliasalias, TheMomCat, codairem

      Is Obama a neoconservative?  Are all of today's politicians, with few exceptions, neoconservatives?

      Isn't neoconservatism where the term "American Exceptionalism" stems from?  If so, I missed this dog whistle during the 2008 campaign.

      What does a neoconservative dream world look like?

      Neocons envision a world in which the United States is the unchallenged superpower, immune to threats. They believe that the US has a responsibility to act as a “benevolent global hegemon.” In this capacity, the US would maintain an empire of sorts by helping to create democratic, economically liberal governments in place of “failed states” or oppressive regimes they deem threatening to the US or its interests. In the neocon dream world the entire Middle East would be democratized in the belief that this would eliminate a prime breeding ground for terrorists. This approach, they claim, is not only best for the US; it is best for the world. In their view, the world can only achieve peace through strong US leadership backed with credible force, not weak treaties to be disrespected by tyrants.

      Any regime that is outwardly hostile to the US and could pose a threat would be confronted aggressively, not “appeased” or merely contained. The US military would be reconfigured around the world to allow for greater flexibility and quicker deployment to hot spots in the Middle East, as well as Central and Southeast Asia. The US would spend more on defense, particularly for high-tech, precision weaponry that could be used in preemptive strikes. It would work through multilateral institutions such as the United Nations when possible, but must never be constrained from acting in its best interests whenever necessary.

      It's difficult to be happy knowing so many suffer. We must unite.

      by War on Error on Sat Jul 27, 2013 at 03:52:41 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  In a way, the "street cred" argument almost (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    War on Error

    makes a twisted kind of sense.

    However, I believe there are ways to be more transparent AND keep some operational secrecy.  

    "Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." --M. L. King "You can't fix stupid" --Ron White -6.00, -5.18

    by zenbassoon on Sat Jul 27, 2013 at 03:08:20 PM PDT

  •  How this doesn't terrify people (6+ / 0-)

    I will never understand.

    We decided to move the center farther to the right by starting the whole debate from a far-right position to begin with. - Former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay

    by denise b on Sat Jul 27, 2013 at 03:30:47 PM PDT

  •  it's so people we are bombing don't know we're (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    schumann, War on Error

    at war with them.
    Better yet so we don't have to keep coming up with new names/enemies for the American public to justify trillions of dollars being made in the war business, of which we truly are Number One, and also because questions might arise like why them?

    without the ants the rainforest dies

    by aliasalias on Sat Jul 27, 2013 at 04:02:53 PM PDT

  •  OMG conspiracy theory! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    schumann, JesseCW

    More and better Democrats y'know.  

    I'm sure that if you watch some more MSNBC it will all go away.

    Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will." -- Frederick Douglass

    by Cassiodorus on Sat Jul 27, 2013 at 04:32:13 PM PDT

  •  I didn't watch the West Wing ... (0+ / 0-)

    ... when it was airing, since I was in Australia ... I'm not sure where I would have watched it, and likely would not have been all that interested in it if I had known.

    But I watched it fairly recently on Netflix, and I think that the capture of a President and Commander in Chief is a more subtle thing than that.

    Its convincingly portrayed in the West Wing as a seduction.

    One of the things that makes the West Wing portrayal convincing is that they are not trying to critique it, they are rather using it to elevate their President Bartlett and show how he has to constantly make these real important decisions in between photo-ops with kids at the Christmas Tree and white tie formal receptions.

    You have the Situation Room with the President, the Chief of Staff, the National Security adviser and/or Asst. Adviser, and a bunch of military types briefing the president about stuff held secret from most of the President's staff. Then sometimes State Department people are called in to provide advise in the Oval Office, and then back into the Situation Room.

    So that's a maximum of four voices in the room that are not committed to the DoD worldview. But the National Security advisers normally come from that world, since that's where one picks up National Security experience ~ its been a long time since the State Department has had the resources and mission to compete with the Pentagon as a place to acquire National Security experience.

    And so normally its down to two.

    And during President Obama's formative experience, one of those two was Rahm Emmanuel, a political operator who would have known full well that a Democratic President has to be substantially more of a warmonger than a Republican President to get even a sliver of credit for being an "effective" "foreign policy" President in the Village Idiot Roadshow that is the DC press corps.

    So really it was just the President in the situation room, and a bunch of Pentagon frame people plus a civilian Pentagon frame accomplice.

    Support Lesbian Creative Works with Yuri anime and manga from ALC Publishing

    by BruceMcF on Sat Jul 27, 2013 at 04:49:56 PM PDT

  •  It's all on a strict need to know basis. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    War on Error

    And the voters and taxpayers DEFINITELY do not need to know!

    Okay, but how many shits is it worth to you?
    Shop Kos Katalogue

    by Words In Action on Sat Jul 27, 2013 at 05:18:10 PM PDT

  •  Jack Goldsmith actually overturned the John (0+ / 0-)

    Yoo's memos. He's a Republican but not a pro-torture one. I really don't understand the need to engage in all this CT.

  •  If you're not doing anything wrong (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    War on Error, JesseCW

    You don't need to know...

    Most truths are so naked that people feel sorry for them and cover them up, at least a little bit. --Edward R. Murrow

    by chuckvw on Sat Jul 27, 2013 at 08:48:10 PM PDT

  •  If you're not doing anything wrong (0+ / 0-)

    You don't need to know...

    Most truths are so naked that people feel sorry for them and cover them up, at least a little bit. --Edward R. Murrow

    by chuckvw on Sat Jul 27, 2013 at 08:48:50 PM PDT

  •  Non-combatant enemy (0+ / 0-)

    of the week.

    Highly correlated to newly radicalized friends and family of last week's enemy.

    Who could've known?

    All this happened, more or less. The war parts, anyway, are pretty much true. - Kurt Vonnegut
    It's a very frightening time when something as basic as due process is seen as somehow radical. - John Cusack

    by dadoodaman on Sun Jul 28, 2013 at 05:42:00 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site