Smart military:)

[avx]

You guys have probably noticed that there are reporters every where military is over in Iraq. You may also know that we have a few veterans browsing these forums, and they can probably second me on this, when I say that infromation, and the element of surprise are 2 of the most important keys to victory in war. Its been said for a long time that our media, and the freedom of the press often hinders our ability to use those 2 factors, after all, if the enemy ever wants to know what we are doing, just turn on CNN right? This is what I have found absolutly ingenius, the military is not only using the media to intimidate the enemy by showing them how many troops are actually there, and what they are planning to do - they are calling these psyc.ops(Psycological Operaions/Attacks) - but they are also using the media to be an unbias big brother, so when they start saying that we "bombed a daycare center" or whatever, we have it on tape that we wernt even in that area, or we have actual footage of their army in full force around their so called daycare center, so they avoid all that nonsense that soldiers are torturing innocents or whatever like they tried in 91. The military has turned its biggest annoyance in war, to an efficient non-lethal weapon

Once again I am so proud to be an american!

I hope this isnt too political or anything, I was just impressed with the war tactic, I dont think I used any political propoganda, or anything that could offend anyone. If I did, my apologies

[Byte 2.0]

No, you kept it very clean.

[M. A. Dockter]

I think this relates too closely to a particular side of the pro/anti war debate. Closing.

[glc]

Thread reopened after move to the war forum.

[Trent Steel]

Very interesting avx487, is this your own theory on the use of media or are you getting the idea from some other source? I had never thought of it that way, it seems to be an effective use of media by the military. I had the general impression that having live media with you would be a detrement while fighting, but I guess with the Iraqi forces knowing when and where they will be attacked they know when to surrender. In no way are my comments indended as an attact on your observation or a pro/anti war stance, but merely a comment on your unique observation.

[glc]

I only have 2 problems with "embedded media" - and one of my 2 issues is supposedly a nonissue.

1. Compromise of classified information - and this has been addressed, supposedly there are firm ground rules in place to prevent this.

2. This one concerns me - what happens if a well-known correspondent winds up getting injured or even killed? I would be very disappointed to see this person's misfortune receive more or better treatment in the media than the injury or death of any of our soldiers.

[Eaglefeather]

I too think this is a rather unique perspective on the use of media. I had been sitting in front of the TV shaking my head by some of the coverage. But the obvious reason so much info on troops, equipment and movement is being released just didn't penitrate my thick skull until I read your theory avx.

The media obviously could not know most of this stuff unless the military released it too them, ergo, the military wants Saddam, his advisors, the Iraqi forces and the Iraqi people to know. They are not going to let anything other than what they approve be released. I would imagine the ground rules for reporters moving with the troops will also be pretty strict and covered by legislation with sever consequences for any reporter that does not comply.

If the idea was to scare hell out of the Iraqi army, then I would say it has worked pretty well so far. It is difficult to say what will happen with the elite National Guard, held up in Bagdad. I suppose it will depend on just how loyal to Saddam the commanders really are. It is much easier to remain loyal when you are well fed, housed and equipped.

Me thinks war is going to take on a whole new perspective in the future. If we don't blow ourselves to smithereenies first, that is.