Eavesdropping to Go On, Cheney Tells Midshipmen

[sabra]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/26/AR2006052601721.html

Eavesdropping to Go On, Cheney Tells Midshipmen
Naval Academy Revels Over Graduation, Reflects on War

Vice President Cheney highlighted America's intelligence efforts yesterday as critical tools in the fight against terrorists at home and abroad and vowed the administration would continue a controversial eavesdropping program that he said has been wrongly dubbed "domestic surveillance."

"I want each one of you to know that the president will not relent in the effort to track the enemies of the United States with every legitimate tool in his command," Cheney said during a graduation address at the U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis. "This is not a war we can win on the defensive. Our only option against these enemies is to monitor them, to find them, to fight them and to destroy them."

Cheney said Bush authorized the National Security Agency after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks to intercept a certain category of terrorist-linked international communications. "If people in the United States are communicating with al-Qaeda, they are talking to the enemy -- and we need to know about it," he said.

...

The highly classified program was "improperly revealed to the news media, some of which now describe it as domestic surveillance," Cheney said. "That is not the case. We are talking about international communications, one end of which we have reason to believe is related to al-Qaeda or to terrorist networks. It's hard to think of any category of information that could be more important to the safety of the United States."

[napi21]

1. OH REALLY!

This is not a war we can win on the defensive.

Is this REALLY something you want to say to the graduates of the Naval Acadamy? Aren't THEY the top of the line in our DEFENSE?

What an ass!!!!!!!

[Biernuts]

10. Navy Top of the Line?

Not really. The Navy is struggling to be relevant in a war where Army & Marines are in the daily headlines. One thing you CAN thank the Navy for is their massive contribution to DoD spending. The Navy consistently builds up China as the emerging near peer with intention to conquer the world, beginning with Taiwain. As a result, DoD acquisition is loaded with unnecessary weapons systems at the expense of the people actually in the line of fire. Don't get me wrong - there are some great individuals in the Navy - like the Doctor who saved several dozen Marines in Falluja, his story was on the cover of Newsweek. But as a military department, they are driving the acquisition of more fast attack subs and carier battle groups that will remain underemployed their entire lifecycle.

On "Defense" - it department name, not a strategy, that was a compromise when the Departments of War and Navy merged in 1948. The DoD mission is to deter war and, when deterrence fails, to win it. It doesn't imply that an enemy is always on offense and the US is on defense in the sense of a sports competition. Waiting to be attacked ensures that the enemy gets to choose the time and place. "The best defense is a good offense." is actually an anonymous quote - probably leaked on background.

[napi21]

12. Uh huh, and those ships aren't ever used as air bases either?

You don't understand the participation of the Navy.

I admit to a bias since my son was in the Navy for 16 years, and although he is now in the reserves, he still works for a civilian contractor on a Navy project.

Most of the supplies, including hospital supplies get to their destination via Navy ship. Many of the planes used in the air assault in Iraq were based on a carrier.

You don't hear much about them, but military ops couldn't be carried out, in the way we're currently doing them, without the USN!

[Biernuts]

17. Thanks, but I understand it all too well

The Navy's forte is power projection as opposed to "close with, engage and destroy" an enemy on a battlefield, asymmetric or linear. Naval forces are strategically mobile, but overall (special ops excluded) the least tactically mobile/oriented of the military services.

One of the finest strategists today is Dr. Thomas P.M. Barnett who, until last year was a researcher on the faculty of the Naval War College, makes the point that we continue to purchase one military, the net-centric warfare (NCW)of large, incredibly expensive weapons platforms. Meanwhile, back on the Iraq and Afghanistan ranches, our troops are engaged, not in NCW inherent to major-power war, but in 4th Generation Warfare (4GW) where maneuver combat has given way to insurgency.

Buying the naval component of NCW is appropriate if you believe that China constitutes a military threat that we will engage. I judge it improbable that we would go to war with China over Taiwan and that the likelihood of China transforming their brown-water navy into a blue-water force that threatens US interests doesn't justify the NCW force structure nor the attendant costs.

[teryang]

18. If you are involved in a conflict where the Navy isn't a factor...

...you'll probably lose. We are a seapower. The idea that US land forces can succeed far from secure sea lanes of communication is not tactically viable, especially in Asia.

The (Rhodesian) forces lite notion is based upon the untenable assumption supported by aerospace contractors and air base builders that enough materials can be moved to support a war effort by air. This idea is inherently defective. That is why they are ideologically committed to the use of pitifully small numbers of ground troops. Their new model of making war is incapable of sustaining the large numbers of ground troops necessary to secure any area inland in Asia.

The Rhodesians are affected by their ethnocentric notions that the groups we fight overseas are stupid unworthy opponents. This hubris foreshadows most military failures.

We are dependent on overseas sources of materials. We need a Navy to protect shipment of those resources to our shores. Unfortunately, we are moving toward a doctrine of seizure of those materials, their sources, and markets, rather than merely securing the sea lanes for their commerce. Big mistake. The trillions wasted in this effort will be the end of us. Our national resources represented by the hundreds of billions already wasted in elective and unsuccessful land conflict preclude us from adapting economically to the new challenges of international economic competition. Like Japan and Germany of the interwar years, we seek to secure markets by force, a diastrous course. Our currency is collapsing under the misguided policies.

[antonialee839]

2. "I want each of you to know that the president will not

relent in the effort to track the enemies of the United States with every legitimate tool in his command."

Well Cheney is right about one thing, the Bush White House is full of legitimate Tools, including Cheney.

I'm sure the terrorists know better than to communicate in a way that can be picked up by
this gang.

[muntrv]

3. The Midshipmen should have turned their backs

on this chicken hawk.

[William Seger]

4. "...every LEGITIMATE tool..."

Goddammit! I hate these lying fascist bastards! :mad:

[jazzjunkysue]

5. At this point, with about 27% of americans buying this line of bull,

one wonders why they even bother.

[Miss Chybil]

6. Eavesdrop on us to hell and back, I don't care!

As long as you have a warrant.

[Mountainman]

7. Someone needs to provide evidence that this spying is for more than

anti terrorism action. They are spying to help hold onto power. God, I hate this administration and what they have done to my country!

[Lithos]

8. This means the next story will be

Where it is shown Bush authorized it well before 9/11/2001.

L-

[genieroze]

9. Cheney's a tool.

[DiscussTheTruth]

11. International yet sitting in our local switch rooms?

[tanyev]

13. "Our only option against these enemies is to monitor them,

to find them, to fight them and to destroy them."

Is he talking about terrorists or American citizens who disagree with him?

[tabasco]

14. Now go out there and fight for freedom !!

What a POS we have for a VP. He's even worse than Bush.

I would be very disappointed to have this scum as my commencement speaker.

No doubt a lot of the midshipmen agree.

[leesa]

15. Remember, to Cheney, WE are Al Qaeda.

[joefree1]

16. That warm fuzzy feeling

Go Cheney yourself.

[HuffleClaw]

19. he LIES so blatantly its not even funny anymore

and of course the midshipmen aren't ALLOWED to show even the slightest bit of opposition: "Cheney found a receptive audience of close to 27,000 in the graduating midshipmen"

[I Vote in 2008]

20. Is this prick for real??

He just sat across the table from Chimpy and persueded him to seal records in the Jefferson case, now this.
This cocksucker really does believe he is above the law, and no once else has any civil liberties.

Who was he talking about when he said "This is not a war we can win on the defensive. Our only option against these enemies is to monitor them, to find them, to fight them and to destroy them"? The American public?

[dmoded]

21. and what is gained..?

do bush and company really think that ahmed and dirka jurka have normal phonecalls consisting of something like this?

'hey ahmed, how about you meet me at the train station at 3pm wednesday'
'dirk, well im not doing anything after yoga really, why?'
'we are going to blow something up, dont tell anybody'
'um okay, ill be there, what should i bring?'
'ah just pack your car with tnt and we'll talk about it when you arrive'

--

really.. their wiretapping is probably providing more kicks out of two teens having phonesex than actually finding any revealing information. just my opinion but i have the feeling the enemy probably speaks in code..

the downward spiral of this administration just gets worse.

[leesa]

22. Don't military folk pledge to uphold the constitution?

[daleo]

23. Cheney - "if you don't like it, I will shoot you in the face"

"And make you, the victim, apologize to me, the shooter. The law doesn't apply to me when it comes to the constitution, or to Texas lawyers."

[xxqqqzme]

24. '...Bush authorized

the National Security Agency after the Sept. 11, 2001'... I read that the DOMESTIC SURVEILLANCE (I don't give a rat's ass what darth cheney wants 2 call it) started prior 2 Sept, 2001.