Friday, May 06, 2011

On the Job Training Continues

It should be well understood that in our digital information age where every single bit of flatulence is Tweeted, Facebooked, Blogged and Conspiracy Disclaimed, that you can only get the straight word directly from the highest levels. The movers and shakers of the nation are the go-to guys for the absolute last word on events. Everything about a governmental action except that which is sourced from the actual game players is to be considered as generated by a creative computer nerd.

So, when you've got an historical event such as the raid on Usama bin Laden, there are going to be a lot of false stories circulating. That's when it is necessary to go right to the top and get....what?

Why Is This So Tough?

When there is that much disagreement between the supposed participants, it is only reasonable to have some doubts about their competence, their veracity, their ability to distinguish reality from fantasy.

Was there a "firefight"? Did UBL have a gun? Was the wife a shield or an accidental cross-fire victim? Was he shot in action or assassinated? Was he really there? Was he really killed? Was he buried at sea? Why aren't the pictures available? Who actually gave the orders? Who is in charge? Who determines what is releasable by whom and when?

Where is the common thread of the narrative?

Why is this so tough to get the story straight?


Tam said...

As far as the "forty minute firefight" goes, I'm chalking that one up to the fact that half nobody in the White House knows which end of a gun the bullet exits.

If DEVGRU hit a house with a dynamic entry, I'd be surprised if there was any shooting still going on after forty seconds.

Stuff is being passed from the military to WH staffers who don't know an MH-60 Pavehawk from an M60E3 from an M-60A1 Patton. These are people who call Marines "soldiers". The raw info they get from the military and the civvie side of the DoD might as well be written in Koine Greek for all they can understand it.

Anonymous said...

Debriefing - it is protocol for a reason.
The author of the article you linked to parses the statements of multiple ranking officials. This exercise could be very entertaining, considering what passes for language comprehension today. But hardly enlightening.