Operation Swarmer – Pundits and Sociocrats Call it Operation ‘Photo-Op’


W. Thomas Smith, wrote in reference to Operation Swarmer:

The latest criticism of the war in Iraq has become so politically manipulative, so disingenuous, so over-the-top that it is undermining a critical cause that we cannot, for a variety of global security reasons, afford to lose.

So what else is new?

We didn’t lose the Vietnam War in the field; it was lost at home, in America from Washington, from the Oval Office to the US Congress. Politicians lost the war, not the generals.
Do we want to repeat history again? The American Left helped the war end in Vietnam the way it did, and they are heading to repeat history – and besides, the Vietnam War was a Democratic Party war.
Iraq is much more important than the Vietnam War (and its difference), in terms of objectivity, and without putting down veterans of that war, and it terms of what could come of it – a nation other than Israel in the Middle-,  Near-East region of the world that would be a democratic republic. Let me educate the political left – the war against Saddam Hussein is over and won; we are now in the phase of reconstruction and providing security for the new Iraqi government.

There are those that want the way things were under Saddam to return and there are those who would rather have theocracy than democracy. Those are the terrorists, the Islamic Fascists. Those are the ones who are putting a monkey wrench in the whole operation, and the media, both American and foreign, who are non-objective and only see things from the sociocrat view, are aiding and abetting freedom’s enemies by supplying them information as well as a morale buildup knowing that America is divided. This is not Freedom of Speech, especially when it is diatribe based on no fact – it’s called treason.

The enemy knows the history of US involvement in Vietnam and hope that the history of Islamic Fascism will end up the same – with Americans withdrawing unable to stay the course. Problem is, this war is not a civil war – it is a global war; and the difference between the first two world wars is that this enemy comes from no specific nation, wears no specific uniform, and like the Imperial Japanese of the 20th century believe dying for Allah (like dying for the deified Emperor of Japan) is a sure way to heaven and Allah’s blessing. Ironically, Allah is just another name for the Supreme Being of the Universe in Judeo-Christian theology.
Smith continues:

As I mentioned in my piece on irresponsible reporting, there is far too much emphasis on blatantly inflammatory words and pictures – any opportunity to focus attention on tired stories like Abu Ghraib or an angry politician’s loaded comments about “no WMDs” or an ‘impending civil war.’

And just like Vietnam, the honor of our troops is at stake here. We have the privilege of living in a country with an ALL volunteer military. That means no one forced anyone to serve. Of course, once one signs on the dotted line – one is expected to serve the full term agreed and do so with honor and integrity. The media never says – “good job” to or about anything our troops do.
Take, for example, the helicopter assault when the Iraqi congress opened in Baghdad on March 16th 2006. The media made it look like a bombing mission and the progressive-liberal-socialist folks were making comments like:

Why are we launching a ‘massive’ bombing campaign in Iraq?

It was a security force operation because the military leaders knew that terrorists would try to kill the Iraqi assembly and everyone present – American and whoever. Then, all of a sudden we were killing and bombing civilians,  according to the media and their Leftist friends, handlers and readers.Why should we do such a thing after spending funds on high-tech weaponry that allows our miltiary to make strategic and pin-point bombing? The invasion of Iraq was not against the Iraqi people, it was against Saddam Hussein, his sons and his henchmen. People saw this strategic, pin-point bombing in action on CNN – and still believe this nonsense?

As Smith points out, air assault is a specially trained unit and they not only provide assault operations but cover for other units and dropped in as a security force. The attack helicopters assigned to the assault unit are there to protect the personnel choppers and medical evacuation choppers. I know, I was an air assault scout and performed many operations of similar circumstances in Southeast Asia and Panama. Air assault units are also used for reconnaissance operations.

Large numbers of helicopter of various models and missions are sometimes required for operations. So if there were 50 helicopters doing a mission on March 16th , this is a normal procedure for the situation. Maybe some columnists should bone up on their understanding of the military and its way of performing operations – getting the facts before so quick to accuse.
On Smith’s article, Slate magazine reported:

W. Thomas Smith Jr. on National Review’s Corner blog tries to clear up the difference between a bombing campaign and an air assault for people who think an air assault will kill loads of civilians.

Not only do Democrats not get it, but they refuse to even look at facts staring them in the face. So, since they couldn’t make it look like a bombing campaign, the media turned it into a White House political media stunt, undermining the real mission of security for Iraqi government officials trying to proceed with government operations like our Congress does, however, Congress doesn’t have terrorists attacking them to stop their operation.
Time magazine:

…contrary to what many television networks erroneously reported, the operation was by no means the largest use of airpower since the start of the war. (‘Air Assault’ is a military term that refers specifically to transporting troops into an area). In fact, there were no air strikes and no leading insurgents were nabbed in an operation that some skeptical military analysts described as little more than a photo op. What’s more, there were no shots fired at all and the units had met no resistance, said the U.S. and Iraqi commanders.

Well, isn’t that good news? No resistance.
Who would dare with 50 choppers filled with troops? Mission accomplished. The local military commander made the decision, not Washington. So how could it have been a photo op?
And here is UPI’s take:

Operation Swarmer, a joint U.S.-Iraqi offensive around the northern Iraqi city of Samarra in Salaheddine province, went into its fourth day Sunday with very little to verify why it has been described as the largest assault operation since the American-led invasion of Iraq three years ago. [Story by Sana Abdallah, Amman, Jordan.

As Smith states in his article,

The assault was based on sound intelligence gathered over the past few weeks, and thoroughly developed in the days prior to the first helicopter lifting off the pad. But the operation was more than just something where there was no exchange of fire – it resulted in the seizing of numerous weapons caches – netting hundreds of mortar-rounds, rocket-propelled grenades, 130-mm artillery rounds of armor-piercing rifle ammunition – as well as recovering terrorist training manuals and videos, stolen Iraqi military uniforms, and various triggers and devices used to detonate explosives.

But it was all just a “photo op.” How degrading to our military commanders and their troops. The Swarmer Operation also captured insurgents and one of them was a ringleader.
Smith concludes in his article:

Yes, Swarmer is proving-out to be both a bloodless military operation – netting weapons, bad guys, and fresh intelligence – and a successful show of force aimed at energizing Iraqi soldiers and demoralizing insurgents: a tactic often employed by smart, successful armies. A triumph in any military commander’s book: Hardly ‘under-whelming” or a ‘media stunt.’

The media is not just bias, they are despicable. They are not only un-objective, but they are traitors.
It is like finding a leak in the operations of national security, printing a story on how the government is fighting against terrorism, then the government finds email instructions that describes how to circumvent security procedures that our government uses, that was once confidential for obvious reasons, but the media printed it anyway – all to point fingers at “underhanded” operations by the Bush administration. Islamic fascists read newspapers and keep tabs on us and other free nations on the Internet.
This is not un-objective; it’s traitorous and poor news reporting. Journalist schools need to produce better journalists and develop a code, like the Hippocratic Oath for doctors. Leave the personal opinions to the editorials, and the news reporting to objective unbiased professionals.
Is anything sacred amidst the efforts to make GW Bush look the fool? This president does that enough on his own without making up despicable tales as added ammunition.

Advertisements