[STARMAN 352ND]

Well if your in the Millitary you can't do these things anymore.
JP
http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/interne....ap/index.html

[djjeffhall]

I just can't see how supressing information, or access to it, is going to help our troops? I'm also a little amazed that the armed forces haven't embraced the technology as a tool to promote what our soldiers are accomplishing. (That's isn't a should we, or shouldn't we be in Iraq statement, just another way the Army, etc. could promote itself wasted.)

[Cavtanker]

There's simply way too many information security violations on those websites. But this move will hurt morale by not being able to use the social networking sites. But it is easy to find ways around things.

[bsmith13]

It's not a matter of limiting access to outside information. It's a matter of protecting bandwidth usage and exercising commsec/opsec.

[chiefs70]

Originally Posted by bsmith13

It's not a matter of limiting access to outside information. It's a matter of protecting bandwidth usage and exercising commsec/opsec.

I agree with what bsmith said above. In reading the article it states that bandwidth is the issue. I work for a Fortune 50 company as an IT geek and you might find it hard to believe the strain and expense incurred by folks browsing these sites. I agree that soldiers should not be banned from accessing the sites but there is a significant cost involved and corporations have limited access to them for quite some time based on this expense. I fully understand many soldiers are unable to connect via other means but the Internet is NOT free and degrading the network is a valid concern. Hopefully there will soon be other options available to our troops to economically access all of the sites they wish to frequent but there is should be no onus placed on the government to provide unlimited bandwidth for non-mission critical activities.

Once again, the average soldier suffers but it isn't simply a matter of freedom of speech to provide access.

[Cardinal]

This raises the far bigger issue of what level of censorship, if any, is required by any army conducting military operations in a hostile environment. Traditionally, there have been no qualms at censorship of mail and the like from those at the front lines for reasons of both public morale and security. Philosophically the practice of censorship may be debatable, but precedent dictates that it has served a legitimate function in the past.

The advent of contemporary ICTs (Information and Communication Technologies) have caused a fundamental shift in human conduct, including that related to the military. Adapting to the appropriate use of such technologies with regard to troops wanting to communicate with those back home, poses challenges substantially different from those experienced in the past. For example, one of the main issues experienced by the Israeli army, with their last incursion into Lebanon, was the use of cell phones by soldiers who were at the front. Their use of this medium to relay information back to their families, in real time, prompted opinion polls and subsequent pressure on both the government and the army to change their strategic direction and objectives - whether this is sound practice during the conduct of a 'war' is arguable, but definitely remains a consideration that previously was not required by those in authority.

[bsmith13]

Another factor that should be recognized is that the Army is limiting access from GOVERNMENT or MILITARY computers. That means any computer with a .mil or .gov is now behind a firewall that will deny access to youtube and myspace. You guys would not believe how often .mil and .gov servers are under attack. Maybe part of it is censorship (reference the opsec/commsec discussion above), but military communications to civilians have been censored for a long time during war.

[mikeb1958]

If the military is worried that some info might be leaked out etc, how about the news channels like CNN and Fox? "We now have troops going to the region that can be found with any GPS system to find Bin Laden. We think he is in that section. Here are the cordinates for that so you can track the troops. Just like a hurricane tracking map". They give out more info than myspace.com and others who would ever think about giving. Censorship at its best.

[mustangdriver]

True, but the media suck in general as well. Any form of pulling the media out is good in my opinion. The media is not concerned in the least with providing an accurate acount of what happened, but what is good story. That whole prisoner abuse scandal that went on is a joke. You have a group of people that cut people's heads off with knives, and that is O.K., but when the US Army made someone put their boxers on their heads, (a college prank) it became torure. Lets all make sure that we are looking at everyting from a fair stand point. Boxers on head=cutting head off of a live prisoner. I don't thinks so.

[mikeb1958]

Originally Posted by mustangdriver

True, but the media suck in general as well. Any form of pulling the media out is good in my opinion. The media is not concerned in the least with providing an accurate acount of what happened, but what is good story. That whole prisoner abuse scandal that went on is a joke. You have a group of people that cut people's heads off with knives, and that is O.K., but when the US Army made someone put their boxers on their heads, (a college prank) it became torure. Lets all make sure that we are looking at everyting from a fair stand point. Boxers on head=cutting head off of a live prisoner. I don't thinks so.

Yes, very true mustangdriver.On last nights national news, they were talking about in Afganistan some 130 civilians have been killed accidently by US troops since the beginning of March or so. Jezz....this is going to happen during "wartime". It's part of the beast, pretty or not. Its the PC folks again probably worrying about the civilain deaths, How about the US soldiers that are dying daily??? Jezz!