Latest Military Operation Fizzles - All Hype, No Results

[easyt65]

Example would be that I believe Operation Swarmer was simply a morale boosting exercise for the Iraqi military.

Which only proves the old addage: "Don't A$$ume because you will just make an A$$ out of U and ME!"

It also proves how little civilians and the media know, how little they are privy to!

 

[MSgt]

There are military operations going on in Iraq all of the time. The operations that involve more planning and heavier goals are given names. The commanders on the ground decide what is and what is not necessary.....not the White House. I know of only one time that the White House got in our way and that was for first Fallujah - second Fallujah was the result of that interference. The fact that media keyed in on this one is of no consequence. One of the reasons for such attention could have been the amount of air power involved. Often, missions are about a show of force to the enemy. It is disheartening and it is a blow to their morale. In this case, the operation was a much needed morale booster for all of those Iraqi soldiers involved and for all of those Iraqi civillians who needed to see that their military is progressing despite the headlines of doom and gloom.

Have you ever thought to recognize that this operation was more about the Iraqi people and not you? Have you ever thought to acknowledge that military intel can't be 100 percent accurate all of the time and the operation might have been expecting more than was found? Do you even know that most of our intel in theater comes form the local populations? Have you ever thought to acknowledge that the media is never accurate when it comes to military operations and that public is only privy to what is authorized to be released?

I bet you did think of such things. Bashing the administration at any cost is just more delightful for some.

It's called partisan slavery. Pathetic.

 

[easyt65]

There are military operations going on in Iraq all of the time. The operations that involve more planning and heavier goals are given names. The commanders on the ground decide what is and what is not necessary.....not the White House. I know of only one time that the White House got in our way and that was for first Fallujah - second Fallujah was the result of that interference. The fact that media keyed in on this one is of no consequence. One of the reasons for such attention could have been the amount of air power involved. Often, missions are about a show of force to the enemy. It is disheartening and it is a blow to their morale. In this case, the operation was a much needed morale booster for all of those Iraqi soldiers involved and for all of those Iraqi civillians who needed to see that their military is progressing despite the headlines of doom and gloom.

Have you ever thought to recognize that this operation was more about the Iraqi people and not you? Have you ever thought to acknowledge that military intel can't be 100 percent accurate all of the time and the operation might have been expecting more than was found? Do you even know that most of our intel in theater comes form the local populations? Have you ever thought to acknowledge that the media is never accurate when it comes to military operations and that public is only privy to what is authorized to be released?

I bet you did think of such things. Bashing the administration at any cost is just more delightful for some.

It's called partisan slavery. Pathetic.

Hu-ah! :applaud

 

[teacher]

I still like farm animals.

That's nice D-man but this is not the place. Now I was wondering, you're always citing polls, quoting people, linking sources etc, but you do realize we know that you only portray one side of the story right? I mean, to quote a guy who disagrees with W. is your right and all, but you seem a little myopic. If you are trying to counter the myopic of the right I understand. But do you really place so much trust in some ex general on CNN trying to sell a book? My question is, do you know anyone who is or recently was on the ground in Iraq? A grunt, a Jar Head, someone not distant, someone who talks to the people on the street everyday, someone who has the pulse of the place? Not reserve or guard, they're pissed they got yanked from school, but regular? I do. Things are going very well from their perspective. Moral is high. They believe in what they are doing and are proud to do so. Regular enlistment quotas are being overshot. You can believe polls, pundits and book pushers all you want, I'll take the word of a man with Iraqi dirt under his nails.

 

[Deegan]

I agree sir, just the tone of this thread makes me Ill, it's like, "ha ha, your little mission was a failure, now I can go trash Rummy, Bush, and anyone else" when it's the soldiers that are really being trashed here. I mean, to even take the time to write this article, it's just mind boggling, I don't understand this cheerleading of our failures there, even when they are not failures at all. I know this, all these men risked their life on this day, what the hell did you cowards that wrote this, or copy and pasted it do today.

Pathetic is right, f**king keyboard cowboys!:roll:

 

[Captain America]

You can believe polls, pundits and book pushers all you want, I'll take the word of a man with Iraqi dirt under his nails.

I should introduce you to Jason, Kimberly and my brother then. Two have returned but my brother is still there. Would you take their word for it if I had them send you an email?

 

[easyt65]

I should introduce you to Jason, Kimberly and my brother then. Two have returned but my brother is still there. Would you take their word for it if I had them send you an email?

Hey Cap, were they drafted?

 

[MSgt]

Hu-ah! :applaud

"OORAH!"

 

[Gibberish]

Hu-ah! :applaud

Interesting.

You post an ornery response when I suggest that the operation was for Iraqi morale but you then respond with "Hu-ah!" when someone else states the same thing?

Is this bias purposeful?

 

[teacher]

I should introduce you to Jason, Kimberly and my brother then. Two have returned but my brother is still there. Would you take their word for it if I had them send you an email?

I'll take your word for it. The way I hear it, the women and children love us. The men hate us. Wonder why that is? What do they say? I'd rather hear what boots on the ground think than anyone else anyday. Are they regular?

 

[easyt65]

Interesting.

You post an ornery response when I suggest that the operation was for Iraqi morale but you then respond with "Hu-ah!" when someone else states the same thing?

Is this bias purposeful?

I was just agreeing with the post of a man with 1st-hand knowledge/experience. BTW, you are wrong - The operation was NOT simply for 'Iraqi morale' and was not a failure by any means!

 

[MSgt]

I should introduce you to Jason, Kimberly and my brother then. Two have returned but my brother is still there. Would you take their word for it if I had them send you an email?

Unless their experience is of a higher level knowledge, then their experience will be local and not reflective of the whole. It would also depend on where they are located inside Iraq. If they are in Basra (peaceful region) they are experiencing nothing that is occurring in the Al-Anbar Province (Marine AOR where the violence is occurring), but they are privy to the outside stories. This would be the same as a civilian reading a headline and assuming that things are worse than they really are. Those individuals that are located in the Al-Anbar province who are witnessing or taking part in the action, likewise have a local idea of Iraq and not the whole.

For example, a bomb goes off in Baghdad. There are literally millions and millions and millions of people located all over Iraq who will not even know and are having a pretty good day of desert sand and desert heat.

 

[MSgt]

Interesting.

You post an ornery response when I suggest that the operation was for Iraqi morale but you then respond with "Hu-ah!" when someone else states the same thing?

Is this bias purposeful?

The mission would not have been just for moral. There is a certain level of heightened logistics involved with any operation. These logistics involve fuel, time hacks, personel, safety, equipment accountability, ammunition, and training. There was definately more to this than just moral.

If the mission did encounter heavy resistance, there would have been undoubtedly civillian casualties. If this occurred, the headlines would have been just as gloomy and just as irresponsible. Either way, for some people, it doesn't seem that the U.S. military or this administration can do anything right.

Case in point: Not a lot of resistance was met, therefore the media paints it as a colossal waste of time or "Latest Military Operation Fizzles - All Hype, No Results"

 

[oldreliable67]

An army captain that has so much time while deployed in Iraq to write a nearly 2000 word entry most of which focused on footage while at the same time claiming not to watch much news? Just dosn't smell right.
You'll have to forgive me for not trusting the news blog of a Fox News correspondant.
I'm not debating his claims, just that he's writing about medial bias while presenting medial bias.

What a strange assertion. Here is a guy, an Army Captain in Baghdad, and you accuse him of 'medial [sic] bias'? How totally weird. If you really want to know what is really going on in Iraq, I suggest you try a few of the milblog sites, many of which can be accessed here.

National Review Online recently asked a group of experts: "What do you consider the most important points to keep in mind when considering Iraq three years after the Coalition invasion?". One of the experts mentioned milblogs.

Here’s what Jonathan Foreman, an author who has reported from Iraq, had to say:

“Millions more Americans now understand the untrustworthiness and dishonesty of the mainstream media — especially the half a million troops who have served in Iraq and who have seen their work go unreported or be misrepresented. (You can be sure that you are getting less than half the picture unless you read milblogs and Iraqi blogs and talk to troops who have come back. When was the last time you read about what the Australians or Poles are doing in Iraq? Have you ever heard a network anchor put our casualties in the contexts of other wars, or even auto accident rates in the U.S.?)”

If you are truly interested in what is happening on the ground in Iraq, network news, CNN, MSNBC, the NYT, the WP, and yes, even Fox, and the rest of the MSM just aren't going to give you what you want or need to know.

 

[jfuh]

Why, because I pointed out a civilian's arrogance and ignorance of military operations and who believes the media is 'in the know' about classified planning and operations or would in any way actually report truth?

You funny. :lol:

No, because of your constant bias of how the left has wronged you and you feel that all the arabs/muslims deserve to be shot at. Not how I would see a military officer in planning or strategy, those comments lact tact. Not very becoming of an officer.
Then is the avatar sect. Nearly all the military guys on here post insignias, you don't post anything.
Also I just find it too coincidental that you just so happen to work on this exact opperation and you bring it up now. But then I see your claim is that you work at the offices in charge of the region, but not claim that you were part of the planning of the operation. Right?
And if operations are classified, only those directly invovled with the planning and execution of the operation would have first hand knowledge. So I would say it's almost fair to say that you would only know about the operation after the fact and even then still have mostly knowledge that was given by the news media.

 

[jfuh]

What a strange assertion. Here is a guy, an Army Captain in Baghdad, and you accuse him of 'medial [sic] bias'? How totally weird. If you really want to know what is really going on in Iraq, I suggest you try a few of the milblog sites, many of which can be accessed here.

National Review Online recently asked a group of experts: "What do you consider the most important points to keep in mind when considering Iraq three years after the Coalition invasion?". One of the experts mentioned milblogs.

Here’s what Jonathan Foreman, an author who has reported from Iraq, had to say:

“Millions more Americans now understand the untrustworthiness and dishonesty of the mainstream media — especially the half a million troops who have served in Iraq and who have seen their work go unreported or be misrepresented. (You can be sure that you are getting less than half the picture unless you read milblogs and Iraqi blogs and talk to troops who have come back. When was the last time you read about what the Australians or Poles are doing in Iraq? Have you ever heard a network anchor put our casualties in the contexts of other wars, or even auto accident rates in the U.S.?)”

If you are truly interested in what is happening on the ground in Iraq, network news, CNN, MSNBC, the NYT, the WP, and yes, even Fox, and the rest of the MSM just aren't going to give you what you want or need to know.

Is there medial bias? Absolutely. Do they have an agenda? Well aside from Fox, I don't know what the agenda of other stations are to be honest.
The captains own words were he doesn't pay much attention to news, but then he's writing then that the news media was bias against his operation in swarm. However, Time was indeed imbeded in that operation and all thier claims seem to check out.
Is it not true that Fox is friendly with the gov? Ie Cheny would only talk on Fox about his hunting accident.
Also, has it not also been known that the armed forces has a PR "division" all together that is known to discredit be just as dirty as large media?
All I want is transparency, none of this cover my *** crap.
I'm simply pointing out the contradictions of the captains statments as well as the relevance with the facts that this thread is about and what Time provided.

 

[easyt65]

No, because of your constant bias of how the left has wronged you and you feel that all the arabs/muslims deserve to be shot at. Not how I would see a military officer in planning or strategy, those comments lact tact.

Also I just find it too coincidental that you just so happen to work on this exact opperation and you bring it up now, when there were plenty of oppotunities to bring it up earlier in the thread but didn't.
Just sounds odd.

1. You are a liar! I have never said all arabs/muslims should be shot. That could not be further from the truth you lying piece of liberal :spin: ! If you did not catch that last sentence, I took offense to that statement VERY MUCH! You don't know me, you don't speak for me! In my line of work, I have promised to die for people I do not agree with simply to provide them the ability to say whatever they want to say, but that does NOT mean that gives YOU the right to speak for ME..and lie doing it!

I have also never claimed the left has wronged me, onlyprovided links to show how clinton betrayed this nation, committed and was convicted of crimes in the betrayal of his oath of office to defend and protect the constitution and the American people, of his failure to act after AQ killed Americans on 4 seperate occasions during his administration, how Durbin and Kerry have aided and abetted the enemy thought attacking this country's resolve and our troops' morale by calling them Nazis and Terrorists while Dean and Murtha dance around like Surrender-monkeys saying this nation will lose this war, demanding we pull out!

2. I have been in service for 18+ years, and I have been stationed here at the HQ in charge of that AOR for almost 4 years, since before the Iraq war! I have worked on plans and the initial beddown of resources and more. Ihave briefed the Commander in charge of that AOR from Day 1 up until 1 year ago. I know more about Iraq, am more privy to what is going on, than you will ever be! That being said, it is none of you business, I did not know I was supposed to check in with you and give you my credentials when i joined this board! All THAT being said, it dies not matter WHAT I do or whom I claim to be! Although I am who I say I am and know what I claim to know, I could be some teenaged kid popping zits and looking at the Cartoon network for all you know.....and BTW, I don't care WHAT you think! Everyone has to make up their own minds....but it is funny, being who I am and knowing what I am privy to, reading so many uninformed 'Intelligent', 'fact-filled' posts of what is REALLY happening...according to the biased media and the Ubre Libs who just KNOW Bush lied, that there was NEVER any WMDs, blah, blah, blah! :lol:

I have not made it widely known what I do or what I KNOW because much of what I know I could not share no matter how badly I HAVE WANTED TO sometimes on this board. Of course, THAT piece of information and $1 might get me a cup of coffee! And I was unaware that I HAD to use my rank as an avatar! Also, Sorry my avatar is not MILITARILY REVEALING enough for you!

 

[Gibberish]

I was just agreeing with the post of a man with 1st-hand knowledge/experience. BTW, you are wrong - The operation was NOT simply for 'Iraqi morale' and was not a failure by any means!

I never once suggested it was a failure.

 

[easyt65]

I never once suggested it was a failure.

My humblest apologies, mi amigo!

 

[MSgt]

I have not made it widely known what I do or what I KNOW because much of what I know I could not share no matter how badly I HAVE WANTED TO sometimes on this board.

I know exactly what you mean. You and I could probably have a good discussion about the WMD issue in Iraq. I'd be interested to hear what you've read or heard.

 

[Gibberish]

The mission would not have been just for moral. There is a certain level of heightened logistics involved with any operation. These logistics involve fuel, time hacks, personel, safety, equipment accountability, ammunition, and training. There was definately more to this than just moral.

If the mission did encounter heavy resistance, there would have been undoubtedly civillian casualties. If this occurred, the headlines would have been just as gloomy and just as irresponsible. Either way, for some people, it doesn't seem that the U.S. military or this administration can do anything right.

Case in point: Not a lot of resistance was met, therefore the media paints it as a colossal waste of time or "Latest Military Operation Fizzles - All Hype, No Results"

I do not believe morale was the sole objective. Of course there was an objective for the mission to try to recover insurgent plans, weapons, or individuals themselves.

Though I believe that intel had a good idea no big resistance would be met and saw it as an opportunity to boost Iraqi solider morale. This is why I was suggesting that there was so much "passion" (for lack of a better word) put into the mission to boost Iraqi morale, which I completely see as a good thing. Iraqi soldiers need their morale boosted and need to be seen as partnered with American solider if not exceeding America in taking control of missions.

 

[jfuh]

1. You are a liar! I have never said all arabs/muslims should be shot. That could not be further from the truth you lying piece of liberal :spin: ! If you did not catch that last sentence, I took offense to that statement VERY MUCH! You don't know me, you don't speak for me! In my line of work, I have promised to die for people I do not agree with simply to provide them the ability to say whatever they want to say, but that does NOT mean that gives YOU the right to speak for ME..and lie doing it!

I have also never claimed the left has wronged me, onlyprovided links to show how clinton betrayed this nation, committed and was convicted of crimes in the betrayal of his oath of office to defend and protect the constitution and the American people, of his failure to act after AQ killed Americans on 4 seperate occasions during his administration, how Durbin and Kerry have aided and abetted the enemy thought attacking this country's resolve and our troops' morale by calling them Nazis and Terrorists while Dean and Murtha dance around like Surrender-monkeys saying this nation will lose this war, demanding we pull out!

2. I have been in service for 18+ years, and I have been stationed here at the HQ in charge of that AOR for almost 4 years, since before the Iraq war! I have worked on plans and the initial beddown of resources and more. Ihave briefed the Commander in charge of that AOR from Day 1 up until 1 year ago. I know more about Iraq, am more privy to what is going on, than you will ever be! That being said, it is none of you business, I did not know I was supposed to check in with you and give you my credentials when i joined this board! All THAT being said, it dies not matter WHAT I do or whom I claim to be! Although I am who I say I am and know what I claim to know, I could be some teenaged kid popping zits and looking at the Cartoon network for all you know.....and BTW, I don't care WHAT you think! Everyone has to make up their own minds....but it is funny, being who I am and knowing what I am privy to, reading so many uninformed 'Intelligent', 'fact-filled' posts of what is REALLY happening...according to the biased media and the Ubre Libs who just KNOW Bush lied, that there was NEVER any WMDs, blah, blah, blah! :lol:

I have not made it widely known what I do or what I KNOW because much of what I know I could not share no matter how badly I HAVE WANTED TO sometimes on this board. Of course, THAT piece of information and $1 might get me a cup of coffee! And I was unaware that I HAD to use my rank as an avatar! Also, Sorry my avatar is not MILITARILY REVEALING enough for you!

It's the "lieing liberal" portion that is of concern. Again, not very becoming of an officer. But you're entitled to your opinion as are all. Just thought you would know better.
Especially with the so called treason you call of Kerry and Durbin.
I don't see how you can call Clinton betraying the nation when Bush has sent more then 2000 brave young souls to the grave.

Out of no disrespect nor pun, a couple questions since you have first hand knowledge.
So what's up with this operation then if not a simple show off of the Iraqi military? Such a large operation and no shots fired? One would think that there'd been significant resistance to be dealt with.

So I guess asking where the WMD's are is classified intel?

 

[MSgt]

I don't see how you can call Clinton betraying the nation when Bush has sent more then 2000 brave young souls to the grave.

It's actually very easy to say for those of us that were in the military through the 90's. Does anyone question why President Bush had to spend billions equipping us right before the war in Iraq? Liberals are fond of using our lack of armor (SAPI) prior to the invasion, but do those same people question why we didn't have them years ago when we could have had them? Does anyone question why Marines and soldiers were drowning in equipment that our fathers used in Vietnam prior to the war in Iraq? Does anyone question what was severely hurt as a result of the surplus? Does anyone question why so many Marines, Sailors, and Airmen died through the 90's and went completely unavenged, setting us up for the next attack?

At least those 2000 troops died performing their duties and fighting yesterday's terrorists and not on post dying by those same terrorists while silly little Americans watched their TV and approving of President Clinton. Don't get me started.

So I guess asking where the WMD's are is classified intel?

There is information you do not know.

 

[easyt65]

blah, blah, blah... Just thought you would know better.
Especially with the so called treason you call of Kerry and Durbin.

I copied the legal definition of treason right out of the constitution, added the link, then added several links to the arguments made how the comments made by Durbin and Kerry fit that legal definition, all in other threads. You and several others ignored those links then, dismissing them because YOU said so, so I see no need to post the same links knowing the result will be the same.

I don't see how you can call Clinton betraying the nation

That IS the problem, isn't it, jfuh?! You can not see how a President SELLING an adversarial nation's military the technology it has needed in order to strike this nation with its Nuclear Weapons is treason! No one will EVER be able to help you with that if you can't see it for yourself!

Out of no disrespect nor pun, a couple questions since you have first hand knowledge.
So what's up with this operation then if not a simple show off of the Iraqi military? - Such a large operation and no shots fired? One would think that there'd been significant resistance to be dealt with.

In partial answer to your question, here is one of mine that has not been addressed yet by anyone:

Can you tell me how many explosives were found? How much material for making IEDs and bombs? Can you tell me how much information we got out of the insurgents we captured or how valuable any of that information has been yet?

So I guess asking where the WMD's are is classified intel?

No ASKING where the WMDs are is NOT CLASSIFIED!

Some of the most critical information that could solve this thing in a heartbeat IS! But there is more than enough unclassified information/evidence out there that is pointing people to the truth...if they were only open-minded enough to see and actually WANTED to see it.

I have noticed that mostpeople are just friggin' lazy anymore! They don't want to do any research themselves to find out what is really going on in the world. They are completely happy to sit on the couch and eat the bias (both ways) spin/dribble that media in America dishes out, complete with agenda! And they hate puzzles - things they have to put together. No, they want everything to be presented to them in 1 package, wrapped up with a little bow! Well, life...and the truth...ain't like that!

But, you seem very intelligent. Surely you HAVE to know that there is much that the American public does not know, that is classified and kept from the public. There is also a lot that America does not WANT to know! Remember the debate about the possibility of secret U.S. torture sites abroad? There were some who came right out and said it - "I don't WANT to know the truth, just keep me safe!" The majority of the public knows only what they are being spoonfed by the party or media they are content with...then there are the few who know more because they actually dig for it. And then there is the rest they will never know....

 

[oldreliable67]

Also, has it not also been known that the armed forces has a PR "division" all together that is known to discredit be just as dirty as large media?

No. As I recall, the Army, through a civilian contractor, paid some Iraqi newspapers to print stories - truthful and accurate stories, IIRC. The critics of the program claimed that because many of the articles were presented by the Iraqi press as 'unbiased news accounts written by independent journalists', and were hence were somehow dishonest, even though factual.

Critics further claimed that somehow this propaganda or information warfare operation was somehow hurting our efforts, in that at the same time, we were making efforts to promote democratic principles, political transparency and freedom of speech.

So its okay with you to show beheadings and what have you on the Internet but not okay to pay to have factually accurate stories published in Iraqi newspapers?