A serious use for silly string

cwjerome

Diamond Member
Sep 30, 2004
4,346
26
81
This is an email that was forwarded to me recently. I am posting this to make a point about the issue of sensitive information, and how the information wars that exist today often compromise the safety and security of our soldiers in places like Iraq.

I can rattle off a list of similar situations... from radio-intercept methods to IED detection methods, how non-secret information that "gets out" can help those trying to kill us. I can tell you for a fact that the gap between enemy adjustments made because of a certain tactic is often less than 6 hours, and is continuous... a tit-for-tat that goes on and on.

In the case of this silly string, the use of this type of gear is NOT new but was kept quiet by the troops for a reason; to give us a leg up in discovering trip wires which might escape being seen. Now thanks to some people, including the friendly press who are amazed that the troops can come up with such a low tech but effective device, and who must have a time in the lime light, EVERYONE, including the people we are fighting and who are utilizing the hidden explosive devices, know what we are doing, how we are doing it and therefore can change their tactics to circumvent our edge.

It was similar to the time when the fact that u/cs were utilizing groin and ankle holsters for their hold out/back up handguns. All I have to say is "thank you " for thinking ahead and being concerned with the safety of our troops. (And yes, the people in theater need to be better briefed on the subject because they are often part of the problem).

-----------------------


FYI and consideration to support.
[?..]
Civilian Test Officer
USAOTC IEWTD
(520) 538-XXXX Voice
(520) 266-XXXX Cell
(520) 538-XXXX FAX
NIPRNET - XXX
SIPRNET - XXX

From: [?.]
Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2006 9:47 AM
To: XXXXX
Subject: Cool idea! (UNCLASSIFIED)
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE

A Stratford woman is collecting Silly String, which can detect trip wires.

By Rebecca Santana, Associated Press

Even in an age of multimillion-dollar high-tech weapons systems, sometimes the simplest ideas can save lives. Which is why a Camden County mother is organizing a drive to send cans of Silly String to Iraq.

American troops use the stuff to detect trip wires around bombs, as Marcelle Shriver learned from her son, a soldier in Iraq.
Before entering a building, troops squirt 10- to 12-foot strands of the plastic goo across a room. If the Silly String falls to the ground, no trip wires. If it hangs in the air, they know they have a problem. The wires are otherwise nearly invisible.

A thousand cans are packed into Shriver's one-car garage in Stratford, ready to be shipped to the Middle East, thanks to two churches and a pilot who heard about the drive.

"If I turn on the TV and see a soldier with a can of this on his vest, that would make this all worth it," said Shriver, 57, an office manager.
Manufacturer Just for Kicks Inc. of Watertown, N.Y., has contacted the family about donating Silly String. Other companies make versions called "party string" or "crazy string."

"Everyone in the entire corporation is very pleased that we can be involved in something like this," said Rob Oram, Just for Kicks product marketing manager. He called the troops' use innovative.

The military, concerned about tipping off insurgents, is reluctant to talk about specific tactics. But Lt. Col. Christopher Garver, a military spokesman in Baghdad, said Army soldiers and Marines were not forbidden to come up with new ways to do their jobs, especially in Iraq's ever-evolving battlefield. And commanders are given money to buy nonstandard supplies as needed, he said.

Soldiers in Iraq have bolted scrap metal to humvees in what has become known as "Hillbilly Armor." Medics plug bullet holes with tampons until the wounds can be patched up. Soldiers put condoms and rubber bands around rifle muzzles to keep out sand. And troops have welded old bulletproof windshields to the top of humvees to give gunners extra protection, calling it "Pope's glass," a reference to the barrier on the pontiff's "Popemobile."

In an October call to his mother, Army Spec. Todd Shriver explained how his unit in the insurgent hotbed of Ramadi had learned from Marines to use Silly String to detect booby traps.

After sending some cans to her 28-year-old son, Shriver enlisted the help of two priests and posted notices in her church and its newsletter. Money and Silly String are flowing in.

"There's so much that they can't do, and they're frustrated, but this is something they can do," said the Rev. Joseph Capella of St. Luke's Church in Stratford.

Shriver and her husband said they would not mind seeing the string become standard-issue equipment, but they don't blame the military for not supplying it.

"I don't think that they can think of everything," said Ronald Shriver, 59, a retired salesman. "They're taught to improvise, and this is something that they've thought of."

Because the string comes in an aerosol can, Marcelle Shriver said, the Postal Service will not ship it by air. But a private pilot who heard about her campaign has agreed to fly the cans to Kuwait, most likely in January, and they will then be taken to Iraq.

Shriver said she would continue her campaign as long as her son was overseas and she had Silly String to send.

"I know that he's going come through this. I hope they all do," she said.
How to Help

A Stratford mother is collecting Silly String to send to her son and other troops in Iraq. They sometimes use the substance, which squirts out in a stream about 10 to 12 feet long, to detect wires connected to booby traps.

Donations of Silly String or similar products and money to defray costs are sought.

Checks made out to Marcelle Shriver can be sent to St. Luke's Church, 55 Warwick Rd., Stratford, N.J. 08084.

[??]
Instrumentation Engineer
Intelligence Electronic Warfare Test Directorate
Ft. Huachuca AZ
520-538-XXXX (DSN prefix: XXX)
 

DaveSimmons

Elite Member
Aug 12, 2001
40,730
670
126
Now thanks to some people, including the friendly press who are amazed that the troops can come up with such a low tech but effective device, and who must have a time in the lime light, EVERYONE, including the people we are fighting and who are utilizing the hidden explosive devices, know what we are doing, how we are doing it and therefore can change their tactics to circumvent our edge.
Yes, the soldiers involved should not have been showing the press their trade secrets, and the press should be more careful about passing on "good news" stories that compromise security.

But the press get hammered relentlessly for only reporting bad news, so I could see a reporter wanting to write about something positive instead of the usual death, failure and civil war.
 

Rangoric

Senior member
Apr 5, 2006
530
0
71
Or another way to look at it.

First they have to know about this. If they already don't know about it which I think they would by now.

Second, either the enemy has to think of something new, or they stop using that style device.

If they think of something new it might take more resources, time or money to do. Which is good. It may be harder to detect, but such a thing would be developed anyways. Also just by observation they would be able to tell that their devices are not having the impact they want them to have and try to come up with something either more boomtastic or harder to detect.

If they just stop using that classification of device. That would be a good thing, fewer civilian casualties.
 

cwjerome

Diamond Member
Sep 30, 2004
4,346
26
81
Originally posted by: Rangoric
Or another way to look at it.

First they have to know about this. If they already don't know about it which I think they would by now.

Second, either the enemy has to think of something new, or they stop using that style device.

If they think of something new it might take more resources, time or money to do. Which is good. It may be harder to detect, but such a thing would be developed anyways. Also just by observation they would be able to tell that their devices are not having the impact they want them to have and try to come up with something either more boomtastic or harder to detect.

If they just stop using that classification of device. That would be a good thing, fewer civilian casualties.

I'm not quite sure what you're saying here. Sounds sort of like it's ok for certain info to make headlines because it drives the bad guys nuts trying to counter our counter.

Hmmm
 

feralkid

Lifer
Jan 28, 2002
16,858
4,971
136
All military secrets are fleeting...everyone has known about this for quite some time.

You, OP are the truly silly one here.

:laugh:
 

cwjerome

Diamond Member
Sep 30, 2004
4,346
26
81
Originally posted by: feralkid
All military secrets are fleeting...everyone has known about this for quite some time.

You, OP are the truly silly one here.

:laugh:


Wow, this gets my vote as the dumbest post of the month.

First, what I am talking about aren't classified as secrets. Second, I never claimed this was a new thing that nobody had ever heard about. Third, your flippant attitude concerning all information on current military tactics and methods is depressing.

This is silly string incident is just an example. But I will not try and explain how a hullevalot of people better than you really DO care about what kind of information gets out, and how it effects us.
 

feralkid

Lifer
Jan 28, 2002
16,858
4,971
136
Originally posted by: cwjerome
Originally posted by: feralkid
All military secrets are fleeting...everyone has known about this for quite some time.

You, OP are the truly silly one here.

:laugh:


Wow, this gets my vote as the dumbest post of the month.

First, what I am talking about aren't classified as secrets. Second, I never claimed this was a new thing that nobody had ever heard about. Third, your flippant attitude concerning all information on current military tactics and methods is depressing.

This is silly string incident is just an example. But I will not try and explain how a hullevalot of people better than you really DO care about what kind of information gets out, and how it effects us.

I guess I hit a nerve, silly boy.
You are truly clueless...My "flippant attitude" is that this is no big secret?
Yet you squeal that you never claimed it was a big secret. :shocked:

Oh wait, that's right...I'm flippant "concerning all information on current military tactics".
Where did you manage to pull that steamer from?
I have family with military intel backgrounds, their safety matters to me, jackass.

Get over yourself and your arrogant "people better than you" attitude, you don't know what the hell you are talking about.

:cookie:


 

sierrita

Senior member
Mar 24, 2002
929
0
0
Originally posted by: cwjerome
Originally posted by: feralkid
All military secrets are fleeting...everyone has known about this for quite some time.

You, OP are the truly silly one here.

:laugh:


Wow, this gets my vote as the dumbest post of the month.



Op, this is the dumbest thread of the year.

You really think the silly string incident is some great intelligence leak.

Good Gawd, you need to buy a clue!

:roll:
 

smack Down

Diamond Member
Sep 10, 2005
4,507
0
0
I'm sure everyone and there mother already knows why a house raided by us troops has silly string everywhere. I'm sure they don't think the we are throwing a birthday party.
 

Rainsford

Lifer
Apr 25, 2001
17,515
0
0
Yes, there is a phrase for this kind of thinking...operational security. Obviously revealing classified information is a problem, but it's equally possible that revealing unclassified, but still sensitive information, can cause a fair amount of harm as well. Like, for example, the fact that you receive email from someone in the Intelligence Electronic Warfare Test Directorate at Ft. Huachuca, AZ, who has access to the NIPR and SIPR nets...and from a machine probably at the fort. Totally leaving out that information would take away nothing from the story or the point you were trying to make, while leaving it in tells everyone who reads this board something they probably don't need to know. A better example on AT was that thread in OT a while ago where people were posting their security clearances.

However, I think people dramatically overestimate how much useful information one can get from the news. While people in the US get most of their information about what our troops are doing from the news, the locals have a much more direct avenue of information. What we need the AP to find out, an Iraqi can get if he just pays attention. Of course never revealing information is better than revealing it, all else being equal, but the actual danger is a lot of times overestimated when your only source is the news. And in this case, the benefits of revealing this information seem to outweigh the negatives...since the Army isn't equipping the troops with silly string, their supply relies on donations from private citizens, and the more who know about the need, the more donations they'll be able to get.
 

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
72,844
33,907
136
This thread reminds me of the Somalia landing where US marines were crawling ashore...under the glare of TV cameras. The US rightwing went into overdrive screaming that the media was endangering our troops by showing the landing live. The fact was that the press was invited to cover the landing by the military. Likewise, given that most press left in Iraq is embedded or hiding in the Green Zone, I suspect that any stories like this that get out of Iraq do so because the US military wants it to get out.
 

cwjerome

Diamond Member
Sep 30, 2004
4,346
26
81
All I can say is WOW!

I got some kid with "family with military intel backgrounds" (LOL at that), others bringing up rightwing something-or-other and others acting like I'm blowing a gasket because it's some big intelligence leak.

Can't you people go crap in another thread? Why does it take someone like Rainsford to offer any sort of reasonable thoughts on the subject?

All this was meant to be was a heads up a problem that does exist: Publications, the government, and just plain foolish people, often helped along by a willing media, often put too much information out concerning certain things that CAN and often DO make a difference for our boots on the ground. This particular situation was a semi-lighthearted example.

This is not to say the silly string situation was a top secret strategy, and I am well aware every countermeasure has a limited shelf life. The use of silly string, it has been in use (in this role) for at least 8 years, as far as I know, but if we can keep things like this from the press for 8 years, why not 16?

The better question is what has "letting it out to the press" done for us? There's a reason why the military does not like to divulge this type of information (see bolded in OP)

Rainsford, you are very wrong about how much information a person can get through non-secret channels. In fact, one of the five types of intelligence conducted by the US military (and governments around the world) is called open-source, and its value is indisputable.
 

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
72,844
33,907
136
Sneaky government makes bad government. Who decides which secrets should be kept secret? In an era when the military is being directed by folks with no moral compass and a distaste for the rule of law some secrets shouldn't be kept.
 

sierrita

Senior member
Mar 24, 2002
929
0
0
Originally posted by: cwjerome
All I can say is WOW!

I got some kid with "family with military intel backgrounds" (LOL at that), others bringing up rightwing something-or-other and others acting like I'm blowing a gasket because it's some big intelligence leak.

Can't you people go crap in another thread? Why does it take someone like Rainsford to offer any sort of reasonable thoughts on the subject?

All this was meant to be was a heads up a problem that does exist: Publications, the government, and just plain foolish people, often helped along by a willing media, often put too much information out concerning certain things that CAN and often DO make a difference for our boots on the ground. This particular situation was a semi-lighthearted example.

This is not to say the silly string situation was a top secret strategy, and I am well aware every countermeasure has a limited shelf life. The use of silly string, it has been in use (in this role) for at least 8 years, as far as I know, but if we can keep things like this from the press for 8 years, why not 16?

The better question is what has "letting it out to the press" done for us? There's a reason why the military does not like to divulge this type of information (see bolded in OP)

Rainsford, you are very wrong about how much information a person can get through non-secret channels. In fact, one of the five types of intelligence conducted by the US military (and governments around the world) is called open-source, and its value is indisputable.



Yeah, everyone is wrong, but ol' C.W.



:cookie:
 

cwjerome

Diamond Member
Sep 30, 2004
4,346
26
81
Originally posted by: Rock Hydra
This is OLD news.

Apparently you still haven't gotten the memo.

The issue of information, and how it CAN and DOES affect troops in combat, is never old news.
 

cwjerome

Diamond Member
Sep 30, 2004
4,346
26
81
Originally posted by: sierrita
Originally posted by: cwjerome
All I can say is WOW!

I got some kid with "family with military intel backgrounds" (LOL at that), others bringing up rightwing something-or-other and others acting like I'm blowing a gasket because it's some big intelligence leak.

Can't you people go crap in another thread? Why does it take someone like Rainsford to offer any sort of reasonable thoughts on the subject?

All this was meant to be was a heads up a problem that does exist: Publications, the government, and just plain foolish people, often helped along by a willing media, often put too much information out concerning certain things that CAN and often DO make a difference for our boots on the ground. This particular situation was a semi-lighthearted example.

This is not to say the silly string situation was a top secret strategy, and I am well aware every countermeasure has a limited shelf life. The use of silly string, it has been in use (in this role) for at least 8 years, as far as I know, but if we can keep things like this from the press for 8 years, why not 16?

The better question is what has "letting it out to the press" done for us? There's a reason why the military does not like to divulge this type of information (see bolded in OP)

Rainsford, you are very wrong about how much information a person can get through non-secret channels. In fact, one of the five types of intelligence conducted by the US military (and governments around the world) is called open-source, and its value is indisputable.

Yeah, everyone is wrong, but ol' C.W.

:cookie:

:roll:

Hard to imagine a person actually being knowledgeable on a subject here at P&N, isn't it?

Now move along to other threads where you have no clue, thx.
 

sierrita

Senior member
Mar 24, 2002
929
0
0
Originally posted by: cwjerome
Originally posted by: Rock Hydra
This is OLD news.

Apparently you still haven't gotten the memo.

The issue of information, and how it CAN and DOES affect troops in combat, is never old news.

Uh, yes it IS old news.

No matter how much you scream and pound your fists on the ground, little boy; no one is buying your hysterics.

:roll:
 

feralkid

Lifer
Jan 28, 2002
16,858
4,971
136
Originally posted by: cwjerome
All I can say is WOW!




Perhaps you could say "Sorry, everyone, I'm a petulant little dictator who can't stand anyone who has an opinion other than my own."


:cookie:
 

cwjerome

Diamond Member
Sep 30, 2004
4,346
26
81
Originally posted by: feralkid
Originally posted by: cwjerome
All I can say is WOW!


Perhaps you could say "Sorry, everyone, I'm a petulant little dictator who can't stand anyone who has an opinion other than my own."

:cookie:


I have no idea where your belligerence on this issue comes from... perhaps I owned you in another topic somewhere, sometime. In any case, I don't care if other people have a different opinion of my own, just post something semi-intelligent to back it up.

BTW, it's not just my opinion, it's the opinion of a majority of officers in the US Army. You know why? Because officers tend to care about their soldiers.
 

feralkid

Lifer
Jan 28, 2002
16,858
4,971
136
Originally posted by: cwjerome
Originally posted by: feralkid
Originally posted by: cwjerome
All I can say is WOW!


Perhaps you could say "Sorry, everyone, I'm a petulant little dictator who can't stand anyone who has an opinion other than my own."

:cookie:


I have no idea where your belligerence on this issue comes from... perhaps I owned you in another topic somewhere, sometime. In any case, I don't care if other people have a different opinion of my own.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-Unlikely. I doubt you've ever owned much except a foul personality.

Your little tantrum about everyone who posted opinions differing from your own is on the first page.





BTW, it's not just my opinion, it's the opinion of a majority of officers in the US Army. You know why? Because officers tend to care about their soldiers.







-I guess you are the only one who knows the opinion a majority of officers in the U.S. Army, because no one else seems to agree with you.

Wake up...you were the one to start flinging insults at everyone else in this thread...if you can't manage to tolerate the opinions of others, you really shouldn't be posting your half-baked paranoid rants on this forum.
 
May 28, 2006
149
0
0
Its a tough call...is it more stupid to post old news as new, or more stupid to feint outrage over a supposed intelligence leak, then actively participate in the supposed leak on the grounds that you have some higher purpose.

Is there some reason you aren't in Iraq, fighting Al Queda?
 

cwjerome

Diamond Member
Sep 30, 2004
4,346
26
81
Actually its an easy call: The most stupid aspect to all this is the fact that a bunch of people who know jacksh!t about the subject at hand want to derail the discussion be making all sorts of insulting comments about me and the topic. I guess that's just SOP in a public forum...

Gardener, you're as learning disabled as some of the others. I am not saying information that gets publicity can be potentially harmful is NEW, I don't have fake (or real) outrage over it, and I am not participating in anything... especially a "leak", lol.

For people like yourself, here's my thesis, verbatim, as posted in my first paragraph: "I am posting this to make a point about the issue of sensitive information, and how the information wars that exist today often compromise the safety and security of our soldiers in places like Iraq."

If you don't believe that certain non-secret info can be harmful to American soldiers, feel free to EXPLAIN why. Because simply saying I am "silly" is pretty weak and doesn't exactly make you look informed. I can guarantee you a lot of important people in the military do not think the subject is silly.
 

halik

Lifer
Oct 10, 2000
25,696
1
81
So they're using silly string, what are the bad guys gonna do, stop using trip wires?