Trump tells Duterte of two U.S. nuclear subs in Korean waters - Polidicks

Just realized that this dude's train of thought is perfectly inline with that stupid ass 4d chess shit that some people un-ironically follow.

This whole argument of 'well you don't know how these things work' is such a goddamn non-argument. It's exactly like people deflecting video game criticisms because 'well you're not a game developer'. All it's really being used for is an attempt to shut people down and stonewall actual discussion

[QUOTE=sgman91;52270972] This is nothing more than conjecture. You aren't even able to provide the kind of evidence that would be required to prove it.[/QUOTE] Just googling "Submarine OPSEC" brings up many pages confirming that yes, that is in fact how submarine crews are supposed to handle things. Maybe instead of just blindly arguing against everything that's coming your way you should look into it more than [I]not at all[/I]. Not that you should really need to however, it's pretty common knowledge that submarines usually operate on a basis of secrecy.

[QUOTE=Trainbike;52271018]Just googling "Submarine OPSEC" brings up many pages confirming that yes, that is in fact how submarine crews are supposed to handle things. Maybe instead of just blindly arguing against everything that's coming your way you should look into it more than [I]not at all[/I]. Not that you should really need to however, it's pretty common knowledge that submarines usually operate on a basis of secrecy.[/QUOTE] I am shocked that people handling nuclear submarines take their job super fucking seriously. Trump should do the same.

[QUOTE=FinalHunter;52271051]Wow. You're all blowing this way out of proportion. Trump saying that we have submarines off the Korean peninsula is like Trump telling him we have F-15s at Kadena Air Base, like no shit. We have nuclear submarines off the coast of a country that's constantly threatening nuclear war?! Woah!! Next you guys are going to be freaking out about people knowing that submarines are in the Gulf or around San Diego. The only person on this forum qualified to bitch about submarines (and maybe one or two others) is MaverickIB. I don't see the rest of you in the military thread talking about your qualifications on the matter.[/QUOTE] F-15s don't make a habit of carrying ICBMs nor is their entire modus operandi based entirely around stealth and secrecy so no, I'm inclined to keep thinking this is absolutely not the same thing Way to read the thread, by the way

[QUOTE=FinalHunter;52271051]Wow. You're all blowing this way out of proportion. Trump saying that we have submarines off the Korean peninsula is like Trump telling him we have F-15s at Kadena Air Base, like no shit. We have nuclear submarines off the coast of a country that's constantly threatening nuclear war?! Woah!! Next you guys are going to be freaking out about people knowing that submarines are in the Persian Gulf or around San Diego. The only person on this forum qualified to bitch about submarines (and maybe one or two others) is MaverickIB. I don't see the rest of you in the military thread talking about your qualifications on the matter.[/QUOTE] It doesn't matter whether or not something is "obvious". You still don't confirm this kind of shit.

[quote]Next you guys are going to be freaking out about people knowing that submarines are in the Persian Gulf or around San Diego.[/quote] Actually, yeah, we would and with good reason. It being [I]likely[/I] there are subs in the area is not in any way similar to [I]knowing[/I] there are subs in the area. Don't mince words.

[quote]He's the president. [/quote] So you're OK with him publicly broadcasting the exact location of the nuclear football and the day's current key? How about the exact number of F-15s on standby on our aircraft carriers? The present locations of all our in-air refueling planes? All these things 'obviously should be deployed' so it's totally safe to just give out their positions right? [quote]And I'm fairly confident our submarines don't have much to fear from the North Korean navy.[/quote] It's a good thing only North Korea cares about our current submarine positioning, right? Oh, wait.

[QUOTE=FinalHunter;52271076]He's the president. If he wants to offer up that information during diplomacy then that's his decision. Discussing OPSEC for Submariners has nothing to do with the actions that Trump can take. And I'm fairly confident our submarines don't have much to fear from the North Korean navy.[/QUOTE] I can see this technicality being fixed after trump is out of office.

[QUOTE=FinalHunter;52271076]He's the president. If he wants to offer up that information during diplomacy then that's his decision. Discussing OPSEC for Submariners has nothing to do with the actions that Trump can take. And I'm fairly confident our submarines don't have much to fear from the North Korean navy.[/QUOTE] We just had an entire thread's worth of posts discussing [I]this exact fucking argument[/I]

[QUOTE=FinalHunter;52271051]Wow. You're all blowing this way out of proportion. Trump saying that we have submarines off the Korean peninsula is like Trump telling him we have F-15s at Kadena Air Base, like no shit. We have nuclear submarines off the coast of a country that's constantly threatening nuclear war?! Woah!! Next you guys are going to be freaking out about people knowing that submarines are in the Persian Gulf or around San Diego. The only person on this forum qualified to bitch about submarines (and maybe one or two others) is MaverickIB. I don't see the rest of you in the military thread talking about your qualifications on the matter.[/QUOTE] There is a very big difference between "we have subs near a volatile country" and "YO we got subs armed with nukes off the coast of a volatile country thats also got nukes [I]and[/I] happens to hate us. We are totally NOT giving them a reason to become even more unpredictable and put millions of lives at risk!"

[quote]You do realize how large the ocean is right?[/quote] A lot smaller than you think when you know they're in those waters. Also makes it much easier to justify the deployment of things to locate the exact positions of those subs and - gasp - track them even after they go off-station.

[QUOTE=FinalHunter;52271076]He's the president. If he wants to offer up that information during diplomacy then that's his decision. Discussing OPSEC for Submariners has nothing to do with the actions that Trump can take. And I'm fairly confident our submarines don't have much to fear from the North Korean navy.[/QUOTE] I'm mostly criticizing the fact that his stupid ass did it in such a way that everyone knows now. It doesn't matter whether or not they represent a significant threat. Following that logic it should be ok for me to smack large snakes in the head since they aren't [I]that[/I] dangerous. There is still a threat and it now has confirmed information that we are dicking around in their backyard. [editline]25th May 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=FinalHunter;52271084] Everybody already knew there was at least one nuclear submarine around the Korean peninsula.[/QUOTE] One submarine that was docked. Now everyone knows that there are others doing something out there. Most likely related to the North Koreans given their recent behavior.

I get the argument that technically, Trump isn't breaking any laws because because he is the president and the president is the supreme executive of the land. But also technically there's nothing in the constitution that says a dog can't be president. I don't think many people in the thread actually care about the legalities, they're arguing whether ethically the president should have the right to blab all this stuff out.

I'm not even worried about the ethics, I'm worried about the security implications.

[QUOTE=FinalHunter;52271094]He didn't give out coordinates lmao he said there are submarines off the Korean peninsula. You do realize how large the ocean is right? [editline]24th May 2017[/editline] The difference is that submariners are not the commander in chief. I would think that's fairly clear.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Sitkero;52270792]Even if Trump is technically allowed to reveal whatever information he wants and even if the Philippines is ostensibly an ally of the US, it is still a phenomenally [I]dumb[/I] idea to be talking about US strategic assets in insecure cell phone conversations Literally the entire point of a nuclear submarine is there's only a handful of people who have even the faintest idea where it is. Even knowing just the general area of a nuke boat is an incredibly valuable piece of strategic information, [I]especially[/I] if you know it's actually a nuke boat and not just a conventional guided missile sub being used as a red herring No matter which angle you come at this from, it was a fucking stupid idea. It's like talking at great length and great volume about your bank account passwords in the middle of a crowded restaurant. Even if you don't spell out your password for all to hear, you're still sharing sensitive information that has massive potential to do harm[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Sitkero;52270830]You don't have to have had a long diplomatic or military career to be able to figure out that information like the locations of nuclear submarines is not information that should be readily shared and easily leaked to the public This whole line about 'well we're just some guys on the internet what do we know' is just so much presumptuous bullshit[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Sitkero;52270909]No, it really bloody isn't 'just conjecture' This really shouldn't be such a difficult concept to grasp. You don't have to be a part of certain circles. You don't need a long career in the military, or in intelligence, or in diplomacy, and all the evidence you need for this being a terrible idea comes from [I]what a submarine is[/I]. The greatest strength of a submarine is that nobody knows where it is. The whole idea is that they could be anywhere at any time. They are supposed to be [I]hidden[/I], they [I]need[/I] secrecy You wouldn't talk about how many spies you have in a foreign embassy, would you? Of course not, they're [I]spies![/I] They're supposed to be a secret, telling someone where they are compromises that secret, and the same shit applies to submarines[/QUOTE] Seriously, the thread isn't that big. It's not hard to read

So, basically, you don't think that Trump providing intelligence on presently operating submarines in that theater doesn't put those submarines at risk because ... why - the ocean is big? That's your disagreement?

[QUOTE=sgman91;52270886]When is the last time you sat in on a high level diplomatic phone call with a national leader? It's actually funny to me to think that being a sonar operator makes you knowledgeable about what happens behind top level closed doors every single day. Remember, I'm not making the claim that this was a good idea. I'm saying that we don't have nearly enough information to make the kind of claims that have been made in this thread, without a shred of evidence I might add.[/QUOTE] there's also something called common fucking sense. trump could shoot a dog in the head and you'd still go "well you were never president so everyone should shut up" do you expect adm richardson come in here and tell us what he feels about the matter? or is trump telling a bloodthirsty loon who's trying to buddy up with china the location of our submarines some 1572D backgammon that us lowly plebs can't comprehend? truly a nimble navigator in the sport of mental gymnastics

[QUOTE=FinalHunter;52271149]Yeah I did, thanks for quoting that shit I already went over for me. Pretty sure I just posted explicitly disagreeing with it.[/QUOTE] The impression I'm getting here, then, is that this is all okay purely because Trump is the president It's okay that he has a flagrant disregard for security and openly gave away the location of US strategic assets to over a cell phone conversation to a man known to be fostering closer relationships with nations unfriendly to the United States purely because he is the president, and it's even more okay because 'the ocean is big' Have I correctly comprehended?

[QUOTE=Sitkero;52271174]The impression I'm getting here, then, is that this is all okay purely because Trump is the president It's okay that he has a flagrant disregard for security and openly gave away the location of US strategic assets to over a cell phone conversation to a man known to be fostering closer relationships with nations unfriendly to the United States purely because he is the president, and it's even more okay because 'the ocean is big' Have I correctly comprehended?[/QUOTE] You have.

[QUOTE=Jund;52271157]do you expect adm richardson come in here and tell us what he feels about the matter? or is trump telling a bloodthirsty loon who's trying to buddy up with china the location of our submarines some 1572D backgammon that us lowly plebs can't comprehend?[/QUOTE] The only valid defense I could think of is that Trump was spreading 'fake news' to other world leaders regarding our sub movements. Even so, that's a very very bad call. Trolling other world leaders is a horrendous way to conduct our political affairs abroad and is a quick way to establish yourself as a man with no principles or scruples. We've already got a bad rap for giving out protected intel. Let's not also get a bad rap for spreading knowingly bad intel.

[QUOTE=Firgof Umbra;52271182]The only valid defense I could think of is that Trump was spreading 'fake news' to other world leaders regarding our sub movements. Even so, that's a very very bad call. Trolling other presidents is a horrendous way to conduct our political affairs abroad [B]and is a quick way to establish yourself as a man with no principles or scruples[/B]. We've already got a bad rap for giving out protected intel. Let's not also get a bad rap for spreading knowingly bad intel.[/QUOTE] Roughly a year late on that...

For the sake of argument, let's stop pretending that North Korea is the only state that's interested in our submarine movements. There are other countries that exist in that area. Technologically proficient and very interested countries. Countries that are watching North Korea themselves already and so are probably already keeping a big eye on movements in the surrounds. Countries that probably aren't all that enthusiastic about our subs in their waters. Countries that would absolutely love the chance to figure out exactly how to detect our submarines while they're on station for who knows how long. Just in case I'm not being plain enough: I'm talking about China. Will they blow those subs up? That's hilarious. Why would they kill the golden goose? This is a golden opportunity for them to try and nail down the signature of those subs and figure out how exactly to track them in the ocean. If they do, that's almost all of the utility of those submarines out the window because the principle utility of a sub is that they're [i]hard to detect[/i].

[QUOTE=Firgof Umbra;52271202]For the sake of argument, let's stop pretending that North Korea is the only state that's interested in our submarine movements. There are other countries that exist in that area. Technologically proficient and very interested countries. Countries that are watching North Korea themselves already and so are probably already keeping a big eye on movements in the surrounds. Countries that probably aren't all that enthusiastic about our subs in their waters. Countries that would absolutely love the chance to figure out exactly how to detect our submarines while they're on station for who knows how long. Just in case I'm not being plain enough: I'm talking about China.[/QUOTE] But the ocean is big.

[QUOTE=FinalHunter;52271198]Okay. Essentially what Trump has revealed is that, if he's telling the truth, there are likely two Ohio-class submarines somewhere off the Korean Peninsula. The Ohio-Class carries an armament of Trident II SLBM's with a range of over 7800 kilometers. So these submarines could be anywhere in the Yellow Sea or the Sea of Japan. They could have other U.S. crafts in their relative vicinity along with relatively quick superior air support and the technological difference between us and North Korea is enormous. For the sake of argument, let's pretend that North Korea has the ability to detect and track the movements of these submarines. If that's the case, they probably already knew they were there. Considering the tension in the area, they were probably already looking, so "around the Korean peninsula" doesn't really help them out. NOW let's say, they have the ability to detect, track, and destroy one of our nuclear submarines. Are they going to do it? Are they going to take an action that would almost require a volatile President Trump to take action against a country when they know he has a strong nuclear presence in the area? No. They aren't. Trump "leaking" this information is little more than diplomacy with Duterte and deterrence with North Korea.[/QUOTE] I think everyone can agree that this was some kind of "diplomacy" in the eyes of Donald Trump. The question here that is being asked is not what he did, it's was what he did a good idea given the circumstances. You've been sidestepping that and repeating, "Trump made a diplomatic move". Is Trump making these statements, with the assumption that China and Russia (Norks as well) will hear, a wise move geopolitically, and do you support that move? Your response?

[QUOTE=FinalHunter;52271214]Go ahead and tell me the repercussions of confirming a belief every other power already held about some of our nuclear submarine's positioning. Please let me know what state-actor is going to use the information that 2 out of 18 of our SLBM capable submarines MAY be somewhere around the Korean peninsula to their advantage.[/QUOTE] I edited my post to address those things.

[QUOTE=Firgof Umbra;52271223]I edited my post to address those things.[/QUOTE] And you are absolutely correct.

You're setting a dangerous mentality on yourself if you believe that a President can do whatever the hell they want regardless the consequences simply because they're of a high authority figure. This is the second time Trump has revealed and/or compromised something, Israel doesn't seem too happy with him putting their operations at risk and now countries like China, India and Russia are positive that the US has nuclear submarines on Korean waters, the usefulness of stealth that watercraft has completely blown by his loose tongue. What's the big deal on the President revealing dangerous information that puts others at risk? Surely, you can figure out the answer to that on your own.

[quote]If China is working on consistent methods to detect our submarines, and I'm sure you're correct that they are, this tidbit of information that Trump leaked is probably of no use to them.[/quote] It's of no use for it to be not just suspected but [I]confirmed by the President[/I] that there are subs operating in those waters? May you never, ever, ever, handle OPSEC. Let me ask you a question: If I tell you I may be in your backyard, will you look? Probably take a glance or just ignore me, right? What if I tell you me and my friend are standing outside your window. You think you're going to give up after just a brief moment now that you [I]know[/I] that we're there? China was given the green light to spend a [I]lot[/I] of resources trying to detect our subs because they have actual confirmed intel that they're actually present and operating there. It's very easy for them to commit lots of resources to confirmed good intel than intel that's suspicious or second hand. Trump basically delivered it to them on a silver platter; they'd be [I]foolish[/I] to not take advantage.

[QUOTE=FinalHunter;52271244] If China is working on consistent methods to detect our submarines, and I'm sure you're correct that they are, this tidbit of information that Trump leaked is probably of no use to them.[/QUOTE] Ah yes, two [B]allies[/B] that may or may not have known. Completely the same as one of our largest rivals. You're pulling a bunch of what ifs out of your ass. And holy shit that last bit, he just gave them the fucking area they are working in. How in hell is that not useful?