Why can’t the media just shut the hell up with PRECISE DETAILS about US military units going overseas in response to threats?

  Yes, that is a distinct possibility, but it also has drawbacks. Once the media and the public discover that they’ve been lied to, the outcry wont be subtle. Future reporting will be scrutinized much more strictly, which may cause even more intricate digging into military operations, and more detailed reporting, thereby defeating the purpose of restricting sensitive information.  

(Randy)

Randi is the female version. 

Sorry fat fingers is my excuse

As a veteran I object to any information which could aide or abet the opposition in harming or killing US personnel.  Saying we are preparing a response to protect our Troops is okay.  Like Randy I object to Unit designations, numbers, and Unit types.  You are providing the opposition with information to both attack both the unit and there families before or after deployment.

The opposition will soon find out this information if their Intel is any good.  So let us make them work for it.

I have been a Rifleman, Unit Leader and Commander in my career (E1-O5).  I have been on multiple combat deployments, in multiple locales.  Most of my Billets were Combat Arms, not support units.  So it was my mates who would be directly harmed, including myself.  It was the men and company commanders and their units under who suffered the casualties.

What I liked about this action was we were not treating the symptom aka Proxies.  We were taking care of the Disease at the source.  War with Iran will not be a continuation of the current Asymmetrical Battle with very restrictive ROE (Rules of Engagement).  It will be the end game with the elimination of the Source - Iran.

This will put the game back to a Cold War between Russia and the US by the elimination of a Proxy. This post was edited by Archerchef at January 4, 2020 7:02 PM MST

News reports can't aide or abet the opposition when they are about an event that has already happened.
Trump's assassination of the Iranian general was conducted in complete secrecy
and the world didn't hear about it until the mission was complete.

When the news is reporting that troops are heading over - that too is part of the government's war strategy.
They want the enemy to know.
The USA is by far the most powerful military country in the world.
It can eliminate most of the Iranian population with a single nuclear bomb.
Or it can deliver accurate drone strikes to any target. 
Trump's military advisors will probably be telling him that a weaker power will most likely surrender rather than face annihilation.

But in my view, such threats are the tactics of bullies, Mafiosi and colonial imperialists.
There were peaceful ways to resolve the original problems. 
This situation could have been prevented from arising many years ago, back in the late 70's, early 80's,
by supporting the Shah of Iran to evolve towards democracy and to prevent a revolution by a minority of fundamentalists.
The Shah would not have wanted to lose his position as the monarch of a dynasty that had lasted 2,500 years. But he was very much in favour of friendship and trade with the West and modernisation. He could easily have seen the benefits of evolving his country towards a British style of democracy which kept its monarch as a titular head.

Aiding free education for the people would have reduced poverty, hence eliminated the seeding ground for fundamentalism.

Even now, peaceful means would still be possible.

Far better to make friends than enemies.



This post was edited by inky at January 5, 2020 11:06 AM MST

Oh no.  I came back to reply to your lovely comment to me and could no longer locate it.  I can tell you this with all sincerity bookworm, I would love spending time with you.  To be a sponge to your ocean of knowledge.  To be a wildflower basking in your light.  I would love to hear your laughter play like music in our conversations.  I have always felt a kinship with you and am forever thankful for the connecting threads of answerMug which loosely bind us across great distances.  Much love to you, my bookworm. This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at January 4, 2020 5:16 PM MST

I'm glad you had time to read them. :)
I discovered I'd accidentally written them into another Mugger's reply window. :/
Then couldn't find the right spot to re-post it to you.

Ha ha!
We'd be like best bosom buddies, or the best of brother-sister, confiding all our daily ups and downs.
I think the light of consciousness would flow both ways,
the wildflower nectars, seeds, herbal creativities would flow both ways  --
and we'd draw Goaty in.
We take him out with us in search of great landscape photography shots.
Or I might drop you off at great locations where you could camp and he, like an Ansell Adams, could capture the best light.

Sponging knowledge - that's easy. The internet is amazing.

I had the sense of you being quite young when we first encountered each other. I think you were dancing and landscaping and still not sure of your future direction. Also, I don't think you'd yet found your life partner. It's wonderful that you found him here on the Mug. Wonderful seeing you move through these life changes.

I see the potential of a budding writer in you.
And if you decided to take it up seriously, I'd happily become a literary buddy, sharing constructive critiques of one another's work.






This post was edited by inky at January 5, 2020 11:48 AM MST

I’m not referring to those reports of anything that already happened. Read it carefully: as a result of what already happened, US military units are being sent to the area. The reports with which I have a problem are the ones that precisely and in finite detail pinpoint the exact who, what, when, where, why and how of what those units are doing and what they are going to do.

I dare say that military experts would understand strategy far better than I ever could.
But I think the element of surprise is only one tactic in war.

Most wars are more like the games of Go, Chess, or Football.
Both sides know almost everything about the enemy's position.
Both manoeuvre for advantage but can't always achieve it.
Both know all the possible moves of the other up to many moves ahead.
Both make contingency plans for all eventualities.

What branch of the military were you in? 

United States Marine Corps. 
~

My hat is off to you. With all respect and thank you for your service.

Thank you, my friend!  I appreciate the kind words and the sentiment. 
~

Twink, I support the media against Trump who says they are the enemy of the people.  That is trash from a trash mouth.  However the media does not get to have carte blanche about matters that can disrupt and damage.  And they DO NOT CARE.  Many of our reporters are wonderful and brave and honest and all that.  Many of them are humans who want a SCOOP. THE BIGGEST SCOOP ever.  And they hurt people in the process.  

Remember that side too.  This is not information that should be read by JOE THE PLUMBER.  

(thier their)

Please read what I have written at least three previous times in this thread: I agree that the media has a duty and an obligation to report and to inform. I also wrote that there are certain things that should not be written about in detail because that type of information also informs enemy combatants of the exact means by which they can harm and/kill our people.  It‘s not necessary to state that this particular unit, from this particular US military base, will depart the US on this particular date with this precise number of people, using this particular mode of transportation and arrive in-country at this particular location and travel along this particular route to this particular destination. Reporting that there will be a military response, fine. Draw a step-by-step roadmap to aid and abet the enemy, no. 

  Here’s a hypothetical example: if an LBGTQ rights activist was targeted by for kidnapping and murder by bigoted hate-mongers, and the media found out the activist‘s exact location, address, telephone numbers, online accounts, vehicle description, license plates, daily routine, safety and security measures, next of kin, circle of friends, etc., would it be responsible or irresponsible to publish all of that information over every broadcast method available to them?  Would it be in the best interests of the public to know every intricate detail about the person’s life and whereabouts? Is there even a slight possibility that the intended perpetrators could also access the publicly available information and use it to their advantage?  Would the exposure of that person’s vulnerability serve any valid purpose? 

I am against cherry-picking when we believe it ok to censor the media and when it is not ok to do so.