UPDATE (15 Mar) – When does “unanimous” not mean everyone? When there is a minority dissent.
1. capable of being believed; believable: a credible statement.
2. worthy of belief or confidence; trustworthy: a credible witness.
e.g., “The degree of credibility of the Board of Directors is diminishing by the day.”
Apparently the “run silent/run deep” strategy isn’t all it was hoped for by the BoD – so today they rolled out their response. One would expect, or at the very least, hope that a major part of the letter would be a reasoned argument for why the Board felt a change in mission was necessary, perhaps a direct response to the unanimous dissent by the USNI Editorial Board or even one drawing on the cogent arguments in this post.
Instead what we got was something not far removed from the standard issue, Mark1Mod0 Wall Street/Pentagon press release that basically says “trust us.” Standard beltway phraseology and hollow assertions (“…there is no guarantee that these increases will continue, nor that past operational deficits will not reappear.”, helped no doubt by the $20,000 used to mail this selfsame letter out to the membership via snail mail – SJS). Claims that well, gee, print media just isn’t what it used to be (but no mention of moving that model to employ more e-books) while asserting the need for an endowed chair to tell the nation that seapower really is important.
Sort of leaves one with a certain sense of deja vu:
Go read the comments section – all demographics are represented, active duty & retired, officer and enlisted, civilian and student. To a one, they, like the editorial board, like noteworthy naval analysts and historians, like concerned naval milbloggers – are all, all of us adamantly opposed to this action. And this letter merely purporting to provide the rationale behind their actions only serves to underscore the intellectual bankruptcy behind such a move.
Reject the mission change & change the BoD.