Current Events 3/17: good job cole

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Internet VFW > Current Events 3/17: good job cole

«‹›145 »

Blind Rasputin: Nov 25, 2002; Farewell, good Hunter. May you find your worth in the waking world.

Why are girls in a military base taking those types of pictures of themselves to begin with?

# ? Mar 10, 2017 16:59

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 8, 2024 07:28

Mike-o: Dec 25, 2004; Now I'm in your room
And I'm in your bed; Grimey Drawer

Because women aren't beholden to what you think is ok and are also people too with sexual desires like any other person. Shut the gently caress up. loving retard.

# ? Mar 10, 2017 17:01

CoffeeQaddaffi: Mar 20, 2009

The Internet, and in particular Social Media, Makes You Stupid.

# ? Mar 10, 2017 17:01

EBB: Feb 15, 2005

Blind Rasputin posted:

Why are girls in a military base taking those types of pictures of themselves to begin with?

nice victim blaming

# ? Mar 10, 2017 17:05

orange juche: Mar 14, 2012

Blind Rasputin posted:

Why are girls in a military base taking those types of pictures of themselves to begin with?

Would you react the same to pictures of dudes getting posted online?

# ? Mar 10, 2017 17:10

Bernard McFacknutah: Nov 13, 2009

You know what would stop all this nude photo swapping? A bit of Female Genital Mutilation. I'm sure Blind Rasputin is with me on this.

Not going to want to swap pictures of your gash if it looks like a butchers dustbin.

# ? Mar 10, 2017 17:14

Godholio: Aug 28, 2002; Does a bear split in the woods near Zheleznogorsk?

LtCol J. Krusinski posted:

Next post about fire eats a probation.

Lighten up, Francis.

# ? Mar 10, 2017 17:25

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

Blind Rasputin posted:

Why are girls in a military base taking those types of pictures of themselves to begin with?

"Why don't they just close your legs. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm gonna go try to find a girl at the local establishment. If she sleeps with me, she's obviously a whore. However, since I am a man, my promiscuity is above question."

# ? Mar 10, 2017 17:27

not caring here: Feb 22, 2012; blazemastah 2 dry 4 u

When bored in the office we used to jump on Craigslist looking for people that were dumb enough to make themselves easily identifiable for a laugh.

Plenty of dudes posting some, errrr, personal photos and then the next would be them in uniform with name, rank and occasionally a unit patch as well.

# ? Mar 10, 2017 17:28

Dead Reckoning: Sep 13, 2011

orange juche posted:

Would you react the same to pictures of dudes getting posted online?

I would. If you're in the military, having naked photos of yourself out there (and by out there I mean they exist at all, because "no one else will see it/find out" is rarely ever true) is opening yourself up to exploitation. This is both a counter intelligence concern, and contrary to good order and discipline: it is going to make it more difficult to compel respect from the lower ranks if they can Google pictures of your tits/dick. The dipshits sharing this stuff and taking creeper shots of female service members need to get court martialed, but I feel that Article 133 should be interpreted to include "taking naked pictures of yourself."

# ? Mar 10, 2017 17:32

Bernard McFacknutah: Nov 13, 2009

CommieGIR posted:

"Why don't they just close your legs. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm gonna go try to find a girl at the local establishment. If she sleeps with me, she's obviously a whore. However, since I am a man, my promiscuity is above question."

Of course she's going to sleep with him, he's paid her, hasn't he?

# ? Mar 10, 2017 17:32

Zeris: Apr 15, 2003; Quality posting direct from my brain to your face holes.

Godholio posted:

Lighten up, Francis.

lol

# ? Mar 10, 2017 17:33

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

Dead Reckoning posted:

The dipshits sharing this stuff and taking creeper shots of female service members need to get court martialed, but I feel that Article 133 should be interpreted to include "taking naked pictures of yourself."

There goes the force.

We're going to have to hire a lot smarter recruits if you want to enforce that. Not to mention how easily that is misinterpretable: Does that cover private relationships? Should a husband and wife who enjoy playing hanky-panky over their phones be required to report the incident to their commander? Do we then also, if someone glances a nude on someone's phone, require them to report it?

While we need to go after these fucks who turned this into a force-wide tit show, you're really walking the line by suggesting nude sharing between consenting adults without force wide sharing be a UCMJ punishable offence. You are not going to legislate away sex via UCMJ, including photo swapping between two people.

However, what the UCMJ SHOULD cover, is people that think having a nude photo of a fellow Marine/Airman/Sailor is grounds for them to share it with all their buddies.

CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 17:38 on Mar 10, 2017

# ? Mar 10, 2017 17:34

Dead Reckoning: Sep 13, 2011

CommieGIR posted:

There goes the force.

We're going to have to hire a lot smarter recruits if you want to enforce that.

We manage OK despite one AETC base I was at quietly taking down the "days since last DUI" counter because the frequency of resets was a source of shame. I know it would be controversial (putting it mildly) to enforce, especially in the swirling military hellmouth of drinking/poor life choices/tech school marriage/adultery/acrimonious divorce, but hopefully after a few idiots got drummed out when their command learned about their XXX Instagram or their predilection for sending pictures of their hog to randos on Tinder, people would get the message that it's a really stupid thing to do.

# ? Mar 10, 2017 17:41

ded redd: Aug 1, 2010

http://www.businessinsider.com/elijah-cummings-letter-to-mike-pence-about-flynn-turkey-lobbying-2017-3

quote:

"Hearing that story today was the first I'd heard of it," Pence said, adding that he "fully" supported "the decision that President Trump made to ask for General Flynn's resignation."

But Rep. Elijah Cummings, the ranking member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, sent Pence a letter on November 18 requesting more information about the potential conflicts of interest posed by Flynn's lobbying work.

Cummings sent the letter four days after both The Daily Caller and Politico reported that Flynn's consulting firm, Flynn Intel Group Inc., had been hired to lobby for Turkish interests.

"Recent news reports have revealed that Lt. Gen. Flynn was receiving classified briefings during the presidential campaign while his consulting firm, Flynn Intel Group, Inc., was being paid to lobby the U.S. Government on behalf of a foreign government's interests," Cummings wrote.

"Lt. Gen. Flynn's General Counsel and Principal, Robert Kelley, confirmed that they were hired by a foreign company to lobby for Turkish interests, stating: 'They want to keep posted on what we all want to be informed of: the present situation, the transition between President Obama and President-Elect Trump.' When asked whether the firm had been hired because of Lt. Gen. Flynn's close ties to President-elect Trump, Mr. Kelley responded, 'I hope so.'"

Pence's office did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

Rep. Cummings told Business Insider through his office that he believes "the problems that have occurred with Lt. General Flynn" could have been avoided had Pence heeded his warnings.

�In addition to being in the press, I warned the Vice President directly three months ago about the conflicts created by Lt. General Flynn�s company lobbying on behalf of Turkish interests," Cummings said.

"If the Vice President had heeded my warnings, it�s clear now he could have prevented the problems that occurred with Lt. General Flynn. Republicans in Congress are doing a disservice to the White House and our national security interests by not conducting rigorous and serious oversight of the administration, especially to help catch issues early and address them.�

# ? Mar 10, 2017 17:44

boop the snoot: Jun 3, 2016

Enforcing it would go about the same as no porn on deployment.

# ? Mar 10, 2017 17:44

facialimpediment: Feb 11, 2005; as the world turns

Fahrenthold is back, this time with a story about what happens to Donnie once he's dead.

https://twitter.com/Fahrenthold/status/840233543657771008

It's shady as gently caress, may be done for tax dodging purposes, and is just all-around loving weird!

https://twitter.com/Fahrenthold/status/840241271553810433

# ? Mar 10, 2017 17:44

Genocide Tendency: Dec 24, 2009; I get mental health care from the medical equivalent of Skillcraft.

TBeats posted:

serious question but how do you shift even more rightward than what they are now without just becoming full fledged nazis?

Nazis spent money on infrastructure.

Also, they had an extensive pre and postnatal care program.

# ? Mar 10, 2017 17:53

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

Dead Reckoning posted:

I know it would be controversial (putting it mildly) to enforce, especially in the swirling military hellmouth of drinking/poor life choices/tech school marriage/adultery/acrimonious divorce, but hopefully after a few idiots got drummed out when their command learned about their XXX Instagram or their predilection for sending pictures of their hog to randos on Tinder, people would get the message that it's a really stupid thing to do.

This is every commander's dream and its not going to happen because we already know they still manage to filter through and do the same thing in the service they did in tech school. Every Commander hopes that some stricter rules will clean up the force, but we all know how that plan ends....

# ? Mar 10, 2017 17:53

Dead Reckoning: Sep 13, 2011

CommieGIR posted:

While we need to go after these fucks who turned this into a force-wide tit show, you're really walking the line by suggesting nude sharing between consenting adults without force wide sharing be a UCMJ punishable offence. You are not going to legislate away sex via UCMJ, including photo swapping between two people.

However, what the UCMJ SHOULD cover, is people that think having a nude photo of a fellow Marine/Airman/Sailor is grounds for them to share it with all their buddies.

Adultery is a crime under the UCMJ. So is a bunch of other stuff (GO1B) that is normally legal between consenting adults. Rarely prosecuted, granted, but the same argument about the behavior being contrary to good order and discipline applies here. No, I don't think we should let the idiots who open themselves up to this in the first place off the hook. I enjoy receiving naked pictures of my partner as much as the next person, but I can understand why, if they're a judge or a cop or a loving military officer, maybe they shouldn't be doing that.

TBeats posted:

Enforcing it would go about the same as no porn on deployment.

So generally ignored until someone does something dumb enough to bring their stupidity to the level where their command can no longer ignore it? Sounds reasonable.

# ? Mar 10, 2017 17:54

Godholio: Aug 28, 2002; Does a bear split in the woods near Zheleznogorsk?

CommieGIR posted:

There goes the force.

We're going to have to hire a lot smarter recruits if you want to enforce that. Not to mention how easily that is misinterpretable: Does that cover private relationships? Should a husband and wife who enjoy playing hanky-panky over their phones be required to report the incident to their commander? Do we then also, if someone glances a nude on someone's phone, require them to report it?

While we need to go after these fucks who turned this into a force-wide tit show, you're really walking the line by suggesting nude sharing between consenting adults without force wide sharing be a UCMJ punishable offence. You are not going to legislate away sex via UCMJ, including photo swapping between two people.

However, what the UCMJ SHOULD cover, is people that think having a nude photo of a fellow Marine/Airman/Sailor is grounds for them to share it with all their buddies.

I'm reminded of the recent Air Force instructor pilot fiasco, where dudes were texting Miley Cyrus lyrics about drug use to each other, someone reported them, they passed all the drug tests and no evidence was found of any wrongdoing, and yet their careers were ruined.

# ? Mar 10, 2017 17:57

Dead Reckoning: Sep 13, 2011

Godholio posted:

I'm reminded of the recent Air Force instructor pilot fiasco, where dudes were texting Miley Cyrus lyrics about drug use to each other, someone reported them, they passed all the drug tests and no evidence was found of any wrongdoing, and yet their careers were ruined.

OTOH, after reading the text messages entered into evidence into evidence, those dudes were 100% buying and doing drugs. They still should have been cleared because the evidence didn't meet any sort of reasonable standard to prove drug use, but I'm not convinced they were innocent.

# ? Mar 10, 2017 18:02

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

Let's be careful we don't conflate consensual sexual relationships with drugs here.

# ? Mar 10, 2017 18:03

Godholio: Aug 28, 2002; Does a bear split in the woods near Zheleznogorsk?

One of the things about this country is that you don't have to prove your innocence. And everybody pissed clean.

CommieGIR posted:

Let's be careful we don't conflate consensual sexual relationships with drugs here.

My only reason for comparison was the "if someone sees your phone habits" bit. Careers (very expensive, and hard to replace careers) were destroyed over nothing more than that, simply because leadership felt like being assholes.

# ? Mar 10, 2017 18:03

Genocide Tendency: Dec 24, 2009; I get mental health care from the medical equivalent of Skillcraft.

Dead Reckoning posted:

Adultery is a crime under the UCMJ. So is a bunch of other stuff (GO1B) that is normally legal between consenting adults. Rarely prosecuted, granted, but the same argument about the behavior being contrary to good order and discipline applies here. No, I don't think we should let the idiots who open themselves up to this in the first place off the hook. I enjoy receiving naked pictures of my partner as much as the next person, but I can understand why, if they're a judge or a cop or a loving military officer, maybe they shouldn't be doing that.

If things haven't changed... The UCMJ has an other than missionary with spouse rule. Basically any sexual activity other than missionary with a spouse for any reason outside of conception is illegal. Believe it or not there are states that still have these laws on the books too.

They just don't punish someone for it unless its either another nail in the coffin or a guaranteed conviction when the rest of the big poo poo they want to nail someone on is unsure. Word was they busted a couple airmen on it at a base I was stationed at, but it probably was a Rod Stewart Rumor.

# ? Mar 10, 2017 18:03

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

The problem wasn't the nude photos. It was the fact that a bunch of dipshits decided to pool it and run their own porn website with active service members as the unwitting models.

Wonder how many male nudes were on there.

CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 18:09 on Mar 10, 2017

# ? Mar 10, 2017 18:07

Mr. Nice!: Oct 13, 2005; c-spam cannot afford

Genocide Tendency posted:

If things haven't changed... The UCMJ has an other than missionary with spouse rule. Basically any sexual activity other than missionary with a spouse for any reason outside of conception is illegal. Believe it or not there are states that still have these laws on the books too.

They just don't punish someone for it unless its either another nail in the coffin or a guaranteed conviction when the rest of the big poo poo they want to nail someone on is unsure. Word was they busted a couple airmen on it at a base I was stationed at, but it probably was a Rod Stewart Rumor.

That's always been a gross misunderstanding of article 125.

quote:

(a) Any person subject to this chapter who engages in unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex or with an animal is guilty of sodomy. Penetration, however slight, is sufficient to complete the offense.

That article is only used to prosecute non-consensual stuff. "United States v. Castellano, 72 M.J. 217 (although Article 125, UCMJ, prohibits every kind of unnatural carnal intercourse, wholly private, consensual sexual activity between adults otherwise proscribed by Article 125, UCMJ, is constitutionally protected, absent some other fact)."

Mr. Nice! fucked around with this message at 18:15 on Mar 10, 2017

# ? Mar 10, 2017 18:11

Godholio: Aug 28, 2002; Does a bear split in the woods near Zheleznogorsk?

CommieGIR posted:

The problem wasn't the nude photos. It was the fact that a bunch of dipshits decided to pool it and run their own porn website with active service members as the unwitting models.

This raises all kinds of good order and discipline issues, in addition to security clearance concerns. [/captobvious]

# ? Mar 10, 2017 18:13

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

Godholio posted:

This raises all kinds of good order and discipline issues, in addition to security clearance concerns. [/captobvious]

I think, if I was a commander, my questions would be: "If you can't keep a nude that someone sends you private between you and the consenting party who sent it, why should I trust you with Intel or Combat tasks?"

# ? Mar 10, 2017 18:15

mlmp08: Jul 11, 2004; Prepare for my priapic projectile's exalted penetration; Nap Ghost

Just lmao if you seriously think we should criminalize a consenting adult couple sharing nude pics or making a sex tape witch each other.

Article 120C already covers a lot of this stuff pretty well.

And blaming someone for taking a picture and then it gets stolen or redistributed without consent is somewhat like blaming someone for having money that gets stolen.

# ? Mar 10, 2017 18:18

Mr. Nice!: Oct 13, 2005; c-spam cannot afford

mlmp08 posted:

Just lmao if you seriously think we should criminalize a consenting adult couple sharing nude pics or making a sex tape witch each other.

Article 120C already covers a lot of this stuff pretty well.

And blaming someone for taking a picture and then it gets stolen or redistributed without consent is somewhat like blaming someone for having money that gets stolen.

If you had a lock on your box none of the money would have been stolen from it.

# ? Mar 10, 2017 18:19

The Iron Rose: May 12, 2012; Cat Army

mlmp08 posted:

Just lmao if you seriously think we should criminalize a consenting adult couple sharing nude pics or making a sex tape witch each other.

Article 120C already covers a lot of this stuff pretty well.

And blaming someone for taking a picture and then it gets stolen or redistributed without consent is somewhat like blaming someone for having money that gets stolen.

I mean there's a pretty obvious correlation to be made here about properly securing classified.

Except that it's a little rich to say they're really equivalent.

# ? Mar 10, 2017 18:21

CHICKEN SHOES: Oct 4, 2002; Slippery Tilde

mlmp08 posted:

And blaming someone for taking a picture and then it gets stolen or redistributed without consent is somewhat like blaming someone for having money that gets stolen.

LOL thats literally what the military does though

# ? Mar 10, 2017 18:21

not caring here: Feb 22, 2012; blazemastah 2 dry 4 u

If sending your dingaling is determined to be a security problem/risk, then make it a condition of service that you don't have a digital copy of your dong.

Don't like it, don't join.

And really that's doing people a favor.

# ? Mar 10, 2017 18:25

FastestGunAlive: Apr 7, 2010; Dancing palm tree.

The big take away from all this, specifically talking about that 4chan screenshot is: don't go barefoot in the squad bay :barf:

# ? Mar 10, 2017 18:29

boop the snoot: Jun 3, 2016

FastestGunAlive posted:

The big take away from all this, specifically talking about that 4chan screenshot is: don't go barefoot in the squad bay

We had a guy who would take a poo poo and not wipe his rear end before taking a shower in basic training.

I'm no snitch, but there are exceptions to every rule and I sold him out to the platoon fast as gently caress.

# ? Mar 10, 2017 18:31

Godholio: Aug 28, 2002; Does a bear split in the woods near Zheleznogorsk?

CommieGIR posted:

I think, if I was a commander, my questions would be: "If you can't keep a nude that someone sends you private between you and the consenting party who sent it, why should I trust you with Intel or Combat tasks?"

That, plus blackmail/extortion concerns for the victims.

not caring here posted:

If sending your dingaling is determined to be a security problem/risk, then make it a condition of service that you don't have a digital copy of your dong.

Dont copy that floppy.

# ? Mar 10, 2017 18:33