Yes, I remember thinking that the idea of an amphibious assault made no sense when I saw it on CNN. That kind of attack is very risky and historically has been used only when there was no other choice or when there was an element of surprise. I wondered if it was disinformation to confuse the Iraqis, which is what it turned out to be.
My observation is that frequently when a report makes no sense it is because it is intentionally misleading.
It is interesting to me that the headline says “DC admits”, which is subtle way of saying that it may not be the whole truth.
Realize that under the Espionage Act of 1917, which is still on the books, revealing the true losses that the US suffered in the attack may be a felony punishable by death:
Whoever, in time of war, with intent that the same shall be communicated to the enemy, collects, records, publishes, or communicates, or attempts to elicit any information with respect to the movement, numbers, description, condition, or disposition of any of the Armed Forces, ships, aircraft, or war materials of the United States, or with respect to the plans or conduct, or supposed plans or conduct of any naval or military operations, or with respect to any works or measures undertaken for or connected with, or intended for the fortification or defense of any place, or any other information relating to the public defense, which might be useful to the enemy, shall be punished by death or by imprisonment for any term of years or for life.
yes indeed
this is about when i learned cnn is not news but pure politics.
