Three things you need to know about "Operation Swarmer" that Wolf Blitzer won't tell you
(Revising and posting this Saturday morning due to Internet difficulties yesterday, so excuse any odd time issues...)
1. The talking point of the day: "the largest air operation since the start of the war..." is your garden variety case of media mob sloganeering. was put out this morning by the Defense Department and has been universally picked up by every major news outlet. Here was the AP story Thursday:
BAGHDAD, Iraq - U.S. forces, joined by Iraqi troops, on Thursday launched the largest air assault since the U.S.-led invasion, targeting insurgent strongholds north of the capital, the military said. The U.S. military said the air- and ground-offensive dubbed Operation Swarmer was aimed at clearing "a suspected insurgent operating area" northeast of Samarra and was expected to continue over several days.
Residents in the targeted area said there was a heavy U.S. and Iraqi troop presence in the area and large explosions could be heard in the distance. It was unclear if the blasts were due to fighting.The military termed the operation the largest air assault since the 2003 invasion, but it was not clear if any U.S. aircraft opened fire during the operation or if there had been any insurgent resistance."More than 1,500 Iraqi and Coalition troops, over 200 tactical vehicles, and more than 50 aircraft participated in the operation," the military statement said.
It was not clear from the 101st Airborne's initial statement exactly what it meant by characterizing the attack as the largest air assault operation since the beginning of the Iraq war. It could refer to the number of aircraft involved or the amount of weaponry involved or some other measure of size. There was no immediate word on whether any fighter jets or other fixed-wing warplanes had dropped bombs or fired missiles as part of the assault. Also left unsaid was how many of the 1,500 total troops involved are Iraqis.
And this is how it was written up in the official 101st Airborne press release -- or rather, in the caption from the ubiquitous helicopter photo that was included in the release...(see it on the RR homepage here):
Operation Swarmer begins with the largest air assault operation since the beginning of Operation Iraqi Freedom. The operation, a combined effort by Iraqi security forces and coalition troops, will continue in the southern Salah Ad Din province for several days as the target area is thoroughly searched.
Such a reference to the "largest air asault" was not included in the actual body of the relase. In fact, the only other reference to this being the "largest" anything is in the last paragraph of the release:
The name Swarmer, the MNF-I statement explained, was derived from the name given to the largest peacetime airborne maneuvers ever conducted, in spring 1950 in North Carolina. Soon after this exercise, the 187th Infantry was selected to deploy to Korea as an airborne regimental combat team to provide Gen. Douglas MacArthur with an airborne capability.
And yet, if you were to take a drink every time a cookie cutter anchor person said "the largest air assault ..." blah blah blah, you'd be as drunk as Dick Cheney on a quail hunt inside of five minutes.
On the other hand, here was David Gregory's first question to Scott McClellan during the Thursday press briefing:
Q Scott, can I ask you a question about this operation underway in Iraq? Does the President think that an offensive like this, high profile, is necessary, in part to turn public opinion around in this country about the war?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, first of all, our commanders in the theater have the authorization to make tactical decisions about the operations that they undertake. And there have been a number of operations that have been undertaken over the course of the last several months to really go after the terrorists and the Saddam loyalists who want to return to the past of oppression and tyranny. So this operation is part of our ongoing efforts to help move forward on the security front. And this includes --
Q Are you saying the President specifically did not sign off --
MR. McCLELLAN: -- I think the military said that this includes American and Iraqi forces. So what we're continuing to do is train and equip those Iraqi security forces, and also focusing our efforts on the enemy, going after those who are seeking to derail the transition to democracy. ...
...Q But my question -- I'm sorry, but you aren't done with my question, which is, beyond the merits of this particular operation, we are coming to the three-year anniversary of the war. Support for the President is at rock bottom; support for this war is at rock bottom in this country. Does the President think it's important as a show of U.S. and Iraqi force to mount these kinds of operations, to try to change public opinion in this country?
MR. McCLELLAN: I can't accept the premise of your question because this was a decision made by our commanders. And it's important that the commanders have the flexibility to make these type of tactical decisions in order to prevail --
And here is what Scott McClellan had to say in the press briefing on Friday (skipping around a bit):
...This last Monday the President talked about the security element, about how we're training Iraqi security forces and they are more and more taking the lead in the fight and controlling more territory. And he also talked about how we're working to defeat the threat from improvised explosive devices.
On Monday, the President looks forward to traveling to Cleveland. The President in his remarks will talk about how we are working with all aspects of Iraqi society to defeat the terrorists and restore calm and order throughout Iraq and helping to rebuild homes and communities and achieving the stability that can only come from freedom. The President will highlight concrete ways and examples of real progress that is being made and how our strategy is succeeding.
Think "the largest air operation since the start of the war" in which we're "clearing out the insurgent stronghold in Samarra" might help Mr. Bush make his case in Cleveland?
Here was another interesting dovetail, elicited in a reporter's question during the Friday press briefing:
Q The second-ranking American commander in Baghdad spoke by teleconference this morning to people over at -- reporters over at the Pentagon. And he said the U.S. military's goal was to have the Iraqi forces in control of 75 percent of the country by this summer. That would more than the President talked about in his speech last Monday. Is the President being more conservative? Is there some disagreement here with the military --
MR. McCLELLAN: No, I don't think you have to view those in disagreement with one another. But the President spoke earlier this week about how we'd like to see Iraqi forces in control of more territory by the end of the year, I believe is what the President said in his remarks.
What we need to continue to focus on is this -- this is one element of our strategy for victory, and that's training and equipping the Iraqi security forces. We're seeing more and more that they're in the lead. I think the commander that spoke earlier today also talked about one of a number of ongoing operations we've had over the last several months when it comes to going after terrorists who are seeking to derail the transition to democracy in the Samarra area. Specifically, there is some intelligence,I understand, that was picked up and then they're acting on that intelligence, as they have done previously in operations in the months preceding this time.
And what's interesting here is that you have a large number of Iraqi forces going in with coalition forces. There are a number of areas where Iraqi forces are taking the lead in the fight, and we're playing more of a supporting role, and allows coalition forces to focus more on going after the terrorist elements that want to create sectarian strife and that want to derail the transition to democracy.
2. The operation isn't really that unique, nor is it a bombing raid. As NBC News reported Friday afternoon, the "air assault" didn't involve the dropping of ordinance -- it was an operation to drop troops (mostly American) into Samarra and clear out suspected insurgent strongholds. For all the PR hoopla, it really wans't that special (so far they've only arrested about 40 people, and no major insurgents to speak of.) From the Military Times sites:
Gen. John Abizaid, chief of the U.S. Central Command, sought to downplay the uniqueness of the raid in a briefing with reporters Thursday.“I wouldn’t characterize this as being anything that’s a big departure from normal or from the need to prosecute a target that we think was lucrative enough to commit this much force to go get,” Abizaid said.
3.The images of the raid weren't from journalists, they were frm the military. Even the pliant Blitzer repeatedly pointed out on his "Situation Room" on Friday that no journalists had been allowed along fo rthe ride (that turns out not to be quite true). Still, all of the pictures you're seeing on television, just like all the information you've been getting up to now, has come straight from the military.
Barbara Starr of CNN even reported that some of the initial pictures released by the Pentagon weren't even of today's assault -- they were of training missionsconducted in preparation for the "assault." And she also reports that the military is saying, as I did in point 1 above, that this operaiton is quite standard -- not something new or special.
The hyping of this rather ordinary military operation was essentially a piece of well-orchestrated theater, proving the White House, in coordination with the military's information outlets -- but often without much cooperation from the generals -- still knows how to make the media dance. Only David Gregory in the afternoon press briefing seemed to catch on to the Bushies' game plan -- changing the headlines to something that makes the war look like it's moving forward and going gang busters, and giving the blogs the chance to revive their "fight them over there so we don't have to fight them over here" meme...
As Jack Cafferty said on CNN yesterday, a key target of this media assault was the American television audience.
Update: TIME Magazine did manage to get a journalist into the action: Brian Bennett, and his report isn't unexpected: Operation Swarmer was a dud. I'll take that up in the next post.
<%
dim done
done = request.form("done")
if done = "" then
done = "No"
%>
Tell a friend
<%
Else
if request.form("done") = "Yes" then
'sets variables
dim email, sendmail
email = request.form("email")
Set sendmail = Server.CreateObject("CDONTS.NewMail")
'put the webmaster address here
sendmail.From = "webmaster@aspbasics.com"
'The mail is sent to the address entered in the previous page.
sendmail.To = email
'Enter the subject of your mail here
sendmail.Subject = "Check out this website"
'send a specific page or send a site url
dim url
'url = Request.ServerVariables("HTTP_REFERER")
url = "http://www.aspbasics.net"
'This is the content of the message.
sendmail.Body = "Site recommendation from a friend!" & _
vbCrlf & vbCrlf & "A friend has sent you this email and thought you would should check out this site." & _
vbCrlf & url & vbCrlf
'this sets mail priority.... 0=low 1=normal 2=high
sendmail.Importance = 1
sendmail.Send 'Send the email!
response.redirect Request.ServerVariables("HTTP_REFERER")
'Response.write ("Sent to ") & email
End if
End if
%>
"[T]he practice of arbitrary imprisonments, have been, in all ages, the favorite and most formidable instruments of tyranny.' Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 84, August, 1788
