We've been hearing, a lot lately, how the Bush administration needs to make a public case for any military action in Iraq. The global danger Saddam poses apparently still in question for many journalists. On that note, World Tribune reports the
US has obtained confirmation of Iraq having weaponized chemical and biological agents...
A key development, officials said, is that Baghdad has managed to weaponize chemical and biological warheads on Iraq's missile arsenal.
For months, the CIA sought to confirm the assertions of the Iraqi defectors, which in some cases appeared suspect, that the regime of President Saddam Hussein had acquired the components and infrastructure through Syria.
But over the last three months, officials said, new information was received that confirmed much of what the defectors had said, Middle East Newsline reported. The information determined that Saddam had abandoned former WMD facilities for new underground facilities and mobile vans.
Officials said the reports of Iraqi successes in WMD development came from a range of defectors.[Emphasis mine]
Our nation's intelligence agencies and Department of Justice
have been scolded for lack of progress in their investigations. The Bush administration has been pilloried for its unwillingness to publicly divulge the details of it's military preparations and
future plans for covert ops. Relationships with certain
questionable foreign "friends" of ours have been roundly condemned. The tie that binds these three truths, however, is not the alleged incompetence or dereliction- rather a new method and strategy for disseminating WoT information.
Hints of operational success, and evidence to support their reason for existence, can be found daily in bits and pieces like the one above. Just don't expect the whole puzzle to be solved on national TV in a shortened news cycle. The simple fact is that this war requires a different set of rules in order for us to succeed. Rules which require that some information be more subtly introduced, lest the operations themselves become subject to the distraction of politics. Pragmatism and strategy are now employed with regard to newly gleaned information- it's value literally measurable in human lives.
Questionable public statements by some nations(ie: Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Kuwait...) don't necessarily paint the truest picture of their involvement. But more importantly, our official responses don't necessarily indicate the internal assessment of said partners' veracity and cooperation. Apply Occam's Razor to the following question:
What is simpler to believe..
1) Pronouncements of non-support by Saudi Arabia, et al, go unrecognized by a stubbornly avaricious and oil-bent Bush administration, content to ignore the obvious?
OR 2) The administration knows perfectly well, with an infinitely greater amount of detail, the true measure of assistance being offered by these partners?
This is calculus of several variables, folks; difficult to follow, but scientific in approach. Those who would publicize the details of ongoing investigations and secret partnerships ignore the irony of their unmet demands for specific information. The press has no discretion; it has only the news cycle to fill with content. Bush and company will hardly sacrifice the medium-to-long term needs of the country simply to satisfy the media's need for fresh "copy." Too much is at stake. The country cannot afford the luxury of seeking their approval for operations...
yet.
The time will come for this, of course, when we are prepared to execute the plan being devised by the executive branch. Until then, evidence of progress in this war will be found in details like those above. The build-up to an offensive in Iraq and perhaps other Middle Eastern states is a tedious process, but rightfully so. It's time for the media to wake up to this new reality.
