Why You Need to Shut Up!

OPSEC isn’t just for the military - it’s for everyone

I learned the hard way how much words - and the smallest bits of information - can cost.

Serving in the Marine Corps Infantry in Iraq, OPSEC - Operational Security - wasn’t a theory or a buzzword. It was survival. It meant keeping your mouth shut about where we were patrolling, when we were moving, or what we had seen. It meant controlling what we wrote in letters, what we let slip on calls home, and even what we joked about among ourselves in the barracks.

Because in combat, the enemy is always watching, always listening.

On patrols in Habbaniyah and other villages in the Anbar province, every movement we made was tracked by someone. A man at a tea shop making a phone call. Kids running messages through back alleys. Someone watching from a rooftop with a cell phone. And often, it wasn’t about classified intel - it was about patterns. A squad always rolling out at a certain time. Foot patrol routes. Convoys choosing the same route more than once. Even a comment over the radio that seemed harmless.

Put enough of those pieces together, and suddenly you’ve given away the plan.

That’s OPSEC. And that’s why it matters.

From the battlefield to the homefront

We practiced OPSEC in war zones because it saved lives. But the principle applies everywhere. At home, Marines were reminded constantly not to disclose deployment dates, unit strengths, or even travel itineraries. Family readiness officers trained spouses not to post “goodbye” photos on Facebook, because an adversary could use that to map out troop movements.

Fast-forward to today, and the risks have only multiplied. Smartphones, social media, open-source flight trackers, real-time ship tracking apps - all of it provides oceans of data. And when journalists, commentators, or even ordinary citizens share too much detail about military operations, deployments, or locations, it’s not transparency. It’s handing adversaries free intelligence.

“It’s already public information…”

I hear these excuses all the time…

“It’s already on Twitter.”

“Flight trackers are open to anyone.”

“This base is public property.”

“Journalists/civilians aren't under any obligation or consequences when it comes to OPSEC.”

Here’s the problem: adversaries don’t need one piece of classified data. They need patterns. OPSEC exists because the mosaic is more dangerous than the tile.

Even if it’s outdated, even if it looks innocent, repeating and amplifying it creates risk. When you stack those posts, tweets, and news updates together, suddenly you’ve revealed a deployment schedule, an aircraft rotation, or a naval readiness posture.

And that doesn’t just endanger warfighters in the field. It jeopardizes missions, infrastructure, and the safety of communities here at home.

I’ve seen this firsthand - in Iraq, and everywhere since

I don’t speak about this in the abstract. I’ve witnessed it firsthand.

In Iraq, OPSEC was life or death. Yet even there, I saw people - sometimes even our own - talk about things they had no business discussing. More often than not, it was journalists. Well-intentioned or not, they held tremendous weight, and too often they reported details that had no business being reported.

And here’s the thing: many of those details were already “out there.” They had been sought out, pieced together, or pulled from other public sources. But just because something is in the public domain doesn’t mean it’s harmless to amplify.

It comes down to a simple question: what good does this serve?

Too often, the answer is “none.” It doesn’t inform the public in any meaningful way. It doesn’t create accountability. It doesn’t change outcomes. At best, it feeds pointless debate. At worst, it fuels protest, misinformation, or even direct risk to lives and missions.

That pattern has never gone away. From Iraq then, to just about every conflict since, and right up to today, I’ve watched the same thing happen.

Puerto Rico: a constant OPSEC challenge

Here in Puerto Rico, I see this problem daily. Our culture is known for its teasing, gossip, and curiosity. That might be harmless in everyday life, but when it comes to national defense, it can turn into a constant flood of reposts, chatter, and recycled reporting - often repeating the same sensitive details over and over.

Add to that the layer of misinformation - sometimes spread intentionally, sometimes simply through irresponsibility - and you have an environment where OPSEC is violated constantly. Not out of malice, but out of carelessness. Out of the assumption that if something is already reported, it’s safe to share again.

But every repost, every retweet, every headline that echoes sensitive information compounds the vulnerability. Each repetition gives adversaries a clearer picture. And that is, at its core, an OPSEC failure.

Routine violations in the age of social media

Beyond Iraq, beyond Puerto Rico, I’ve seen this play out routinely across every platform.

I’ve observed countless instances - in fact, routine violations - of OPSEC on LinkedIn, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and beyond. It’s everywhere.

Much of it comes from aspiring or self-taught “influencers” who feel compelled to pump out content, repeating and recycling information just to beat each other in the race for likes, clicks, and eyes on their posts. What they don’t realize - or perhaps don’t care to realize - is that this irresponsibility carries real risk.

And perhaps I’m wrong, but I’d argue I see more of this here in Puerto Rico than in many other parts of the United States. There’s a cultural tendency to overshare, to gossip, to repeat. That might feel harmless in everyday life, but in a security context it becomes dangerous.

Why this is more dangerous today

In the past, OPSEC violations required multiple data points to form a pattern. That’s no longer true.

With the advent of AI, it doesn’t take much - one or two pieces of information can be enough for an adversary to predict movements, vulnerabilities, or intentions. Add to that the prevalence of hacking and cybersecurity breaches, and suddenly even what you share in private messages can’t be assumed safe. Unless you’re face-to-face, one-on-one, you should assume nothing is truly secure.

Which raises the most important question:

👉 What business do I have speaking about this?

If the only answer is “transparency” or “because it’s already out there,” then that’s not good enough. Transparency is not a shield for irresponsibility. Not when lives, missions, and communities are at stake.

Final thought

OPSEC isn’t about censorship. It isn’t about silencing. It isn't about secret nor classified information, as there is a problem if we have such information to begin with. It’s about discipline. It’s about protecting who and what protects us.

As a Marine, I learned this in combat. As a veteran and professional working at the intersection of defense, workforce, and industry today, I see it being forgotten too often.

So here’s my reminder - to journalists, commentators, influencers, and everyday citizens: Think before you post. Report with context, not coordinates. Not with maps and locations of assets. Protect who and what protects us.

Thank you for reading and for your consideration.

-Glomani Bravo-López

#OPSEC #OperationalSecurity #SeguridadOperacional #NationalSecurity #SeguridadNacional #Military #Militar #Defense #Defensa #DefenseIndustry #IndustriaDeDefensa #DefenseManufacturing #ManufacturaDeDefensa #AdvancedManufacturing #ManufacturaAvanzada #HyenaEnterprisesGlobal #IndustrialBase #BaseIndustrial #Aerospace #Aeroespacial #Shipbuilding #ConstrucciónNaval #DefenseTech #DefensaTecnológica #WorkforceDevelopment #DesarrolloLaboral #Innovation #Innovación #ArsenalOfDemocracy #ArsenalDeLaDemocracia #PuertoRico