The next war thread

[Undertoad]

USS Clueless makes a good point this morning: there is a tremendous amount we don't know, and won't come out until afterwards.

He suggests that maybe the embedded reporters are part of the plan to confuse, to bring attention to certain highly-visible parts, in order to draw attention away from other parts.

[Undertoad]

To back that up, he points to an Israeli expert who sez:

Most of those interviewed agree that, paradoxically, despite the unprecedented media coverage of the war, including the many correspondents who are embedded in fighting units, nobody knows what is really happening in Iraq. Yossi Peled, former GOC Northern Command, thinks the U.S. has shown great skill in its control of the media. "You have lots of television crews in the field, yet as someone watching TV you have no overall picture."

Military historian Prof. Martin van Creveld goes further: "Everyone is lying about everything all the time, and it is difficult to say what is happening. I've stopped listening. All the pictures shown on TV are color pieces which have no significance."

"There is a lot of disinformation," he concludes. "Every word that is spoken is suspect."

Shahak says that until now the Americans have managed to conceal their true battle plan. "Do you know what the Americans have planned? I don't. They also never said (what they were planning to do). How do you topple a regime in 48 hours? In a week? Seventeen days? If we don't want to make fools of ourselves, we should wait patiently. It would just be arrogant to judge from what we see on TV."

[Undertoad]

Still, I was very amused to hear that yesterday they blew up GPS jammers with GPS weapons. I bet that was a strategic statement...

It just goes to show all the people who were wildly speculating with "what if" scenarios that would be bad for the military: the military has thought this stuff out to an amazing degree. If we lay people can say "what if", you can bet a professional has already thought of it and developed many different approaches. That's why they are so flexible out there.

[wolf]

CNN is the enemy's best intelligence asset in modern warfare.

[russotto]

Originally posted by Undertoad
[b]Still, I was very amused to hear that yesterday they blew up GPS jammers with GPS weapons. I bet that was a strategic statement...

Or a practical test. Of course, they didn't give details... it could be the "GPS weapons" were made to target the jammers once they lost their GPS fix. My personal guess is that the Iraqis got cheated -- they probably got some old obselete (Russian? Chinese?) jammers which knocked out the C/A code but not the P(Y) code.

Technical digression:

The C/A -- coarse/acquisition -- code is the unencrypted code used by civilians and used by some older precision equipment to help acquire the P(Y) code. The P(Y) code is more precise and uses encryption (called A/S, Anti-spoof). The higher code rate and the encryption both make jamming more difficult, as well as making spoofing (without cracking the encryption) near-impossible. The military has been working on ways to directly acquire the P(Y) code without the use of the C/A code; I assume they've succeeded. Though it wouldn't really matter for a cruise missile fired from friendly territory, as it could acquire the code before launch and hold on to it.

[tw]

Originally posted by juju
Tw, how do you filter through all the confusing nonsense and actually come up with an understandable reconstruction of all this stuff?

Very little in the news on this war is confusing. But it helps to understand perspective of the report. For example, Rumsfeld is in a defensive position and finds lying as acceptable behavior. Therefore everything he and the administration says requires serious confirmation.

Central Command wants to be honest but must not tell everything. For example, when Swartzkopf said the door was closed and Republican Guards could not escape north of Basara, I kept asking how? When reporters kept asking the same question repeatedly, then I knew I was not the only one smelling a rat. The naive just called the reporters stupid for not understanding the answer the first time. Perspective. I knew better. They smelled a rat and we now know they were right. Roads through swamps do not stop armor. But that is what Swartzkopf had to claim since the 101st was stopped half way to their objective. IOW I suspected he was lying because of things well beyond his control. Again, perspective.

Embedded reporters are providing numerous Gems in the rough. For example, Ted Koppel accurately provided important details of that repelled Apache attack when he said every Apache suffered damage. This was confirmed by newspaper stories of how badly each chopper was hit - some having to eject their guns that had even caught fire. A fact they says thery are all lucky to be alive. Chopper crews got out and all hugged each other. That is how badly mauled those Apaches suffered. As Koppel then noted, 3rd Army would have to change tactics. What worked in the Gulf War no longer works in Iraq. The enemy learned. Perspective.

BBC is a constant source of good information. So is ABC. NBC & CBS does provide some, but not as well. Reports from the little people in the field is where most gems are found. And then every report is put to a map. No map means you have wasted time listening to the news. Too many will never understand this war if they think "wordwise". If one does not think "geographically", then one has no clue.

I have a benefit. I read extensively things like the Pentagon Papers, Clancy's non-fiction books, recently Daniel Ellsberg's book which mostly reminded by of what so many had written previously, the many books by David Halbersham, have maps of the current territory, personal statements from my peers who were in Nam, read BlackHawk Down, and watched how the news was reported in Nam. Everyone and much more applies to this war. And I read like I read car reviews. Perspective. Why does Liza Thomas Laurie report crap? Her perspective is hype and ratings - not honest facts. She will lie by telling half truths. Same logical analysis with perspective also applied to all news from Iraq.

If you cannot see through the half truth lies in local TV news, then you most certainly would be swamped by Iraq war news.

Kennedy was so successful because he kept asking during the entire missile crisis, "What is he thinking? What does he know? Why would he say that? What is he being told?"

I am so appauled by the war mongers who did not see through the administration's propaganda. Reports today are no different from those in Nam or from the Gulf War. But it helps to have seen it all done back then - AND then have seen what was really and what was not true - after the fact. Did we really understand that CBS news report on how we had to burn the village to save it? That report only demonstrated that we were the enemy in VietNam. But war mongers accused the reporter and CBS news of being anti-American. That is what war mongers must do - filter out facts that contradict their already pre-concieve attitudes.

IOW I am desperate for more gems. The reporter who says how their terrain has changed from desert to fertile lands - a gem. The description of those bridges in Nasiriyah and the BBC reporter who found town after town unsafe to keep asking questions. We are not (yet) the welcome invader once those little gems are discovered.

What happened to those 12 maintenance soldiers ambushed in Nasiriyah. I hate when silly people say the pictures were too gruesome. I need those picture to evaluate for myself what happened AND how accurate my sources are. For example, the administration says soldiers were executed. Fine. Show me the pictures because I don't trust anything from this administration. Perspective and their history of distorting facts.

I cannot get enough information. There is not filtering. There is extensive piecing of every statement into a big jig saw puzzle.

Some gems that have me seriously bothered. Iraqis have not used radar guided anti-aircraft defense systems. Why? What are they waiting for? They have chemical weaspons. When will they use them (and they most certainly will)? Technicals have finally figured out how to take out an Abrams tank with a newly designed anti-tank missile. Suddenly American armor is not so invincible in land that will not be as tank friendly (it helps to understand what is and is not tank friendly and to have maps to see where a smart Iraqi would make a defensive stand).

War is that assymetrical meaning that it is a most intriguing, multi-dimensional jig saw puzzle. Not hard to understand. Every piece fits in the puzzle if you understand where it is coming from. View it from many different perspectives - which is why I have been so against this war - and why I am so concerned for how we will win this war, and why I cannot get enough news.

[tw]

Originally posted by Undertoad
Still, I was very amused to hear that yesterday they blew up GPS jammers with GPS weapons. I bet that was a strategic statement...

No quite what he said. Of six identified jammers, only one was believed destroyed by a GPS guided munition. They did not blow up jammers with GPS weapons. Only one may have been destroyed by a GPS guided weapon.

[tw]

An example of a Gem:

From the New York Times or 26 Mar 2003
Iraqi forces continued to attack in what soldiers described as futile, almost fanatical assaults against M1-A1 tanks and Bradley armored fighting vehicles

The article then describes how Iraqis even tried to crash their car into a tank. Tank crushed the car without firing a shot. But this demonstrates how badly the Iraqis want to be liberated.

Also describes by the NY Times is another gem. 3rd Army must now expend more forces to surround the town of Najaf because Americans are finding whole cities too much in support of Saddam. That means much less forces to attack Replublican Guards using a division that may not have been sufficient size to make the attack originally - according to too many Gulf War generals.

After Najaf, then Karbala must be surrounded since it too cannot be taken. An then Al Musayyib. And why is As Samawah being so quite? These gems only continue to say what administration refused to admit when we started this war. We will be at war for a long time. But then the Generals did not get the plan they wanted - directly traceable to multiple actions of the George Jr administration.

[Undertoad]

Oh, I see; "gems" is code for "statements that make it through my selective filtering for anything that proves my predetermined conclusions."

I've probably had a few "gems" myself. It's hard to avoid.

[That Guy]

Originally posted by jaguar
it's like protesting cloning or GM

What's wrong with General Motors? I know their 350 leaks like a civ, but that just means you can replace the rear main at 50k and the valve cover gaskets 20k later. I don't think I'd protest it though. Just get a good mechanic.

[elSicomoro]

Originally posted by tw
BBC is a constant source of good information. So is ABC. NBC & CBS does provide some, but not as well.

Dan Rather is officially over the hill. It occurred late last week when he said, "And the rockets red glare, the bombs bursting in air." Jesus...

I've stuck mostly with MSNBC/NBC, BBC, CBC, and the ABC (Australian Broadcasting Corp.). I've watched a little CNN and Fox as well, and was visiting Al-Jazeera until Sunday night (when they started having server issues). I've been hitting the Sky News and ITV sites as well. I personally don't find ABC and CBS to be that strong newswise anymore...for several years now.

[Undertoad]

Gem:

- Former weapons inspector Scott Ritter, hammering the last nail into his own coffin of illegitimacy, angrily says that the US will lose the war.

(Maybe if Saddam uses the WMDs he says they don't have?)

[elSicomoro]

Originally posted by blowmeetheclown
What's wrong with General Motors? I know their 350 leaks like a civ, but that just means you can replace the rear main at 50k and the valve cover gaskets 20k later. I don't think I'd protest it though. Just get a good mechanic.

Hey! I had a 350 in my '88 Caprice and it never leaked a drop of oil! I put 140K miles on it before I sold it.

[tw]

Originally posted by Undertoad
Former weapons inspector Scott Ritter, hammering the last nail into his own coffin of illegitimacy, angrily says that the US will lose the war.

UT would have all readers forget that the US won every battle in VietNam - every one - often decisively - and yet lost the war soundly and completely. War mongers are quick to have us forget these lessons of history.

This war will not be won if we don't win the land. Currently the US holds no territory except the little that contains military forces. That, even defined in the Art of War, means we are not winning. And we will not win IF we end up the enemy of Iraqi people - which we are quickly becoming.

Currently on ABC news are people desperate for emergency rations while openly blaming the US/British - not Saddam - for their plight. Where is this victory that UT proclaims when the liberated people blame their liberators? Does anyone remember VietNam? UT does not realize how precarious the US position in Iraq really is. It still could go either way.

When you don't like what is said, then war mongers put on their filters. They insult others by posting irrelevant nonsense - such as Scott Ritter is a child molester. One could even say UT is a server molester. But that too would be irrelevant.

[Uryoces]

Originally posted by blowmeetheclown What's wrong with General Motors? I know their 350 leaks like a sieve, but that just means you can replace the rear main at 50k and the valve cover gaskets 20k later. I don't think I'd protest it though. Just get a good mechanic.

They closed down the plant <crap, can't remember which one now> in the US and started making the blocks south of the border.

tw, you have a particular slant on things, a bit left-leaning. It sounds like you are reading from someone's political playbook. I like to think I have a centered world view, but my view's pragmatic tendencies lean to the right. Hell I'm the guy that gets his war coverage from Comedy central's "Daily Show with John Stewart".

What I'm saying is that you don't have a privelleged view, no matter how many times you bring up the Pentagon Papers. You've got a lot of great knowledge on subjects political, and I spend a great deal of time Googling the facts you bring to bear, but a lot of what you are stating is opinion.

You revelation that we can't trust what the current aministration is saying is not a news flash. The fact that a great many people will lose their lives is not a news flash either. If this were a Gore war, it would be in Columbia, ensuring that the coca fields are protected. No one is innocent in this.