Thread: Command Blogging

I'm not necessarily one to toe the party line, but I feel personal blogs that have anything to do with our military opns anywhere on the planet are a definite no-no.

Why make the enemy's intel opns any easier?

& leave the dis-information attempts to the professions, imo.

The article offers an excellent discussion of issues surrounding local, bottom-up political initiatives and the issues involved with maintaining momentum generated from the initial effects of the "surge". It's certainly worthy reading and informative but this is a well-placed guy holding a valued and prominent command.

It seems unusual. There's no link from the JPOST to, for instance, the Belmont Club so it may well have been written exclusively for the JPOST. It seems to finish as though "to be continued". Finally, the choice of JPOST is, again, also perplexing. I'm baffled by the intent.

I think that it's unusual but am unaware of the command culture and uncertain of the intended audience.

I have to agree with Skull6, on one hand we are led to believe they are shorthanded over there,and have no time to themselves other than sleep between ops, and then we have to read these blogs, while I agree some really do open your eye's others just leave to many questions.............write the book when you get home.

In the traditional sense, I do agree that we should shut the f*ck up but do read through this thread

http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/ope...-new-post.html

We have effectively shifted the responsibilities from battalion down to platoon. The troop leader and the troop warrent are making policy. Blogging is one way of showing us about giving our word ... and keeping our word ... and it goes to show Taliban supporters giving their word ... and breaking their word.

I don't know exactly on how this all plays out. I can find examples of Majors making policy with company size garrisons in India and Africa during two centuries ago.

I am thinking I am seeing the same kind of things now.

Colonel,

I think there's a certain credibility and honesty that might arise from this phenomenon of blogging. I don't quite know how to characterize Colonel Caraccilo's effort. It seems to be original content intended for the JPOST opinion page...and a continuing story.

I find this unusual, I suppose, though enlightening regarding his comments on the grass-roots Iraqi political scene relative to issues of reconciliation. Valuable to our better understanding? For me, yes. Appropriate for a senior commanding officer? I just don't know but the scratchy feeling on the back of my neck suggests there's something a bit wrong with this picture, though I'm damned if I know exactly what.

OoE, your comment about platoon leaders and warrants got me thinking that command responsibility is being decentralized at many levels. We expect brigades to perform divisional missions of the past-perhaps even Corps-level missions. We look to these senior field-grade commanders to conduct expeditionary-styled operations where THEY may be the face of America-both militarily and diplomatically. O-6. No stars. Eagles for rank insignia.

Finally, again, I'd be interested in opinions/speculation of the venue choice. What lies behind JPOST being the chosen outlet? Is there higher command support for this piece? If so, why? If not, what are the professional consequences to Col. Caraccilo and why would he choose to do so in light of those possible repercussions?

I've taken some time to do an internet search on this Colonel's name. After doing so, I'm left with more questions than answers.

At first read of the posted article yesterday, I wondered if the choice of posting in the JP was so that he could "get the word out" while remaining out of the mainstream political eye.

After reading some of the results of my internet search, I'm left wondering if the Colonel is really just "trying to get the word out," or is he trying to toot his own horn more. It could be that he's trying to drum up more support from our State Dept. in regards to the "reconstruction" efforts of his unit, but other "views" (& no, I don't necessarily believe everything I read on the internet) have me wondering if this is indeed his sole focus.

As I don't know him personally, I'll remain the reluctant optimist, thinking that he is indeed attempting to show the American populace that the need for military force is being outweighed by the need for the true "Nation-builders" of our government in his AOR now. (This is something I've heard quite often of late from Soldiers returning to the Post where I work--that it is much more a political struggle than a military one anymore in Iraq, or at least in the AORs in which they were assigned.)

& I still say that posting information, such as which specific unit was/ is operating where at any given time, or giving the actual names of any Soldiers associated with this information, is detrimental to our efforts. If I can do the internet search, so can others. & I didn't take much time reviewing & cross-referencing the information that I did find...

Uh...you're correct.

This is one very interesting guy...

I really don't know what to think now.

"...& I still say that posting information, such as which specific unit was/ is operating where at any given time, or giving the actual names of any Soldiers associated with this information, is detrimental to our efforts."

Yeah. Goes without saying. I think my concern goes more towards cowboy policy-initiatives or one-man self promotion schemes.

I've got a feeling that this guy's got cover for what's going on. Now, having said that, WHAT's going on and why the JPOST as the venue still is unclear to this simpleton?

He's certainly an honorable member of the airborne mafia with an interesting command past. That much is clear.

Originally Posted by S-2

Yeah. Goes without saying. I think my concern goes more towards cowboy policy-initiatives or one-man self promotion schemes.

I've got a feeling that this guy's got cover for what's going on. Now, having said that, WHAT's going on and why the JPOST as the venue still is unclear to this simpleton?

Understood. I'll try to post here if I learn anything else...or perhaps have any alcohol-induced epiphanies concerning this conundrum?

P.S. I'm still trying to determine when he was promoted to O-6. Everything I've read so far (except the link S-2 posted) lists him as an O-5...

He's on a high speed/low drag flight profile to me.

Colonel Dominic Caraccilo's Bio- TF Marne

Link with photo (to include subdued eagle rank insignia about mid-chest).

As long as there is appropriate oversight (and allah knows, there is some excellent opportunities for a screw-up either on the too-lenient side that allows for inadvertant disclosure, OR - more likely, in my opinion - too strict, and this becomes just another ham-handed propaganda effort), I believe this is the vehicle we've all been looking for, re: getting the truth of the matter out there. On that battleifield this contest turns, and there is simply too much ignorance out there right now, both about OUR side, and the real situation on the ground.

Americans think their troops are killing Iraqis in huge numbers, and that they themselves are like bowling pins that the terrorists are able to knock down at will. They believe that what they saw last year is still the situation today. They believe that we're LOSING.

So, I think that this is the way to reverse our absolutely horrible information campaign. I'd encourage it, watch it closely, and let it bloom into widest reach and impact, with as light an official hand as operational security allows.

I know what you old dinosaurs (relax, fellas; it's a term on endearment, and I use it with affection ) are saying, but I do believe that the old instincts are wrong, here. LESS about security (because, frankly, I think guys like these know what they can and cannot safely say), and much, much more about objective, verifiable TRUTH, which is our best weapon to determine what this battle is now all about: the perceptions of our People AND our enemies.

The problem for me is that Col. Caraccilo has already had a, IMV, too prominent role as commander of 2-508 Inf. (I think) back in October, 2003. Google up LTC Caraccilo and draw your own conclusions.

"I'd encourage it, watch it closely, and let it bloom into widest reach and impact, with as light an official hand as operational security allows."

He's an interesting dude with a previous background in off-the-cuff grassroots P.R. In fact, "...watch it closely..." is my fear. Given Col. Caraccilo's interesting past, I wonder...and wonder again. It's not like the senior command isn't aware nor that it's impeded his professional progress to date. It certainly hasn't unlike, for instance (perhaps), John Nagl-who won't be seeing eagles.

I don't know anything of the past w/ Col. Caraccilo except that his "campaign" was amateurish in it's targeting and quickly uncovered by McClatchy here in the states. Perhaps naively so with best intent. Perhaps w/ overt command emphasis regardless of the positive support of the troops for the message conveyed.

Specifically with Col. Caraccilo, is he the most credible voice? If not, was his brigade's story the most compelling example of the sunni-shia rift? If not, why him and why this story rather than somebody else?

"They believe that we're LOSING."

Check out this PEW Center press release of recent pollings-PEW Research Center- Increasing Optimism About Iraq

It's changing fast for the better. Maybe too fast. My concern now is how to temper undue optimism or pessimism. Our public takes a mercurial view of war. It's a long fight with terrible issues of corruption, sectarian fighting, and poor governance still grinding corrosively away.

Blues, I've very few, if any OPSEC concerns anymore. Damn near everything is public access it seems. I agree that Americans don't understand these wars, much less the differences between them. Few know still, for instance, of the Korengal Valley.

"...too strict, and this becomes just another ham-handed propaganda effort."

Funny enough, I go straight to the source for some excellent stuff (CJTF-82 website as example). Best photos and important stories that you'll never read elsewhere. It's image, of course, is too biased for general acceptance. Yet if you want to learn, for instance, what a PRT actually DOES, it's a great place to start.

I'm sort of into Ivory Palace intrigue these days at the D.A. level. Caraccilo intrigues me. So too his story. So too this specific article. I'm likely sniffing down a dead-end, not even sure of what it is I'm seeking.

Originally Posted by S-2

It's changing fast for the better. Maybe too fast. My concern now is how to temper undue optimism or pessimism. Our public takes a mercurial view of war. It's a long fight with terrible issues of corruption, sectarian fighting, and poor governance still grinding corrosively away.

Quick comment re: public opinion:
You're absolutely correct. I've heard it said in the hallways at SOCOM HQ that we're always one Chinook crash away from defeat. Losing double-digits of soldiers/SEALs/air commandos has the potential to take us from euphoria of certain victory to doubt about the cost/benefit, and all of a sudden we're back on the treadmill, where every negative reaction on our domestic front gives the Bad Guys another reason to hang on a little longer, commit another spalshy atrocity, and drive our confidence in the other direction.

We can only go through the up/down cycle a few times before it doesn't go as far up as it used to, and the defeatists look like they were right all along.

Tet did that in '68. It could happen again, and if we can't keep 'em off-balance enough to make it too hard for them to pull off the war-winning blindside hit that we didn't predict or stop...we could lose, even as we're winning.

The fact is simply this: a democratic republic like ours sometimes is too weak to win its wars. Not militarily too weak, but in the way that counts most: politically.

"...but in the way that counts most: politically."

Underpromise and overdeliver. Stay away from any "light at the end of the tunnel" and simply assume it's an on-coming train.

I believe a war like these best prosecuted will end with the American public becoming bored with a resolved issue and not quite remembering when victory was actually declared yet it's self-evident. Even now support rises over Iraq as it fades from the media's circulation/ratings-driven range of interests.