I wish I knew more than I know about how the war is going. There is too much information coming in to digest, too much detail; and yet it is hardly ever placed in a strategic whole. In part this is due to poor press reports, and in part it is due to poor analysis; there are very few excellent analysts on TV. In short, there isn’t enough good information (oddly!) out there.
But if you are interested in following almost hour-by-hour reports, I recommend that you go to these two sites: The Command Post and The Agonist.
Our government says that all is well. I think this is true because, one, I trust our guys more than I do the press (or our enemies) and two, because from what little real information I have I think all is well. The Turks have not invaded. Israel hasn’t been attacked. The oil fields are secured. Weapons of mass destruction haven’t been used. There are signs that Shiites are beginning to revolt and once they are confident that we will win, they will revolt with gusto. We have taken over most of the country in less than a week. Our lossess are minimal (much less than the first six days of the Gulf War, both men and materiel). We have lost twenty men (eight due to accidents), have killed a few thousand Iraqis, and thousands have deserted, many killing their officers trying to stop them.
Our makeshift military hospitals are treating more Iraqi soldiers and civilians than they are allied troops. Supply convoys have continued to move despite the terrfible sand storm.
Furthermore, we seem to be following an intelligent plan, one that continues to surprise our enemies; all those associated with the plan are saying that we have not yet been surprised by anything that our enemy has done. For those that say that we will run into huge problems because the Fedayeen are stronger than we thought--that they will fight us in the cities and we will take huge lossess that we will not be able to sustain--I say that is not so. Besides, we are killing off the regular army and blowing up their equipment; they can’t be replaced. If we end up fighting them in the cities (as the Brits are already doing in Basra), we will be able to take them with (I hope and pray) only minimal losses. And, we can bring in more troops, if necessary. What can I say about our troops and their courage? Churchill: "What a glory shines on the brave and true!" May God Bless them.
I agree, there is just way too much information to digest. It appears that the first information is generally wrong and then it eventually gets clarified. I suppose it that "fog of war" stuff as well as just plain old war-rumors.
Although I was initially in favor of the reporter embedding experiment, I now have my reservations. The reason is because I think the reporters don’t have a basic understanding of military strategy and tactics (neither do I for that matter) and when the units they are in get into a relatively minor skirmish, to the reporters this might as well be the battle of Stalingrad. To the untrained reporters, there is no perspective or context. I’m not sure what the alternative is and I’m not sure if this will be done again in any future conflicts.
I also find it interesting that warfare now has an element of public relations to it. I guess it is just an extension of propaganda and psychological operations.