War In the 21st Century

Carl and Dan have written before about a war simulation that they play: The Battle Of Stalingrad with each person representing the Russians or the Germans.

One the aspects that their simulation doesn't take into account is the Media.

What do I mean by that? I mean that there is no Russian CNN to broadcast hundreds of thousands of Russians slaughtered back to the Russian people. There is no embed reporter among the troops taping German snipers picking off Russian soldiers.

I write this as the violence in Iraq worsens. I write this as President Bush is trying to win a war in which every move he makes is broadcast to the world: which includes the enemy..

For example, in Iraq, the Mahdi militia, 800 strong, recently took control of an Iraqi town. Let's say President Bush ordered two Batallions to go into the city and take them out. Chances are the media would get hold of the story, put it on the Internet, put it on Broadcast news that Americans were going to go in to take out the Madhi's. Now with our firepower, chances are the Mahdis are going to get wiped out. But that's not the point. Its puts our troops at risk. It increases the risk of more Americans dying.

Or, let say that President Bush wanted to send 2 aircraft carriers and 10 battleships to North Korea to enforce the UN sanctions. How long before that information got out?

Now, President Bush could keep totally silent about any military moves right? WRONG. The outroar would be unimaginable. HEADLINES: BUSH CONDUCTING SECRET WAR.

Its funny isn't it? In the Battle Of Stalingrad, it makes you wonder about if there were a "Sunshine Policy" with the Russian media. Maybe the Russians would have saw what a monster Stalin was. Seeing the senseless slaughter, maybe they rise up . . . .

In the 21st Century, for America, we need what World War I & II offered. Stealth and silence. Which, I argue, is the only way we are going to defeat our enemy which Midwest readers, if you forgot, are the terrorists.