I must say, I was a little bummed about the notion of 500 or so combat journalists, most of whom are undoubtedly young, liberal products of our nation's universities, and therefore out for a big story that makes them look good by criticizing the military, accompanying our troops into Iraq. In WW2 battlefield press was ok, because they were on our side. Now, they proclaim themselves to be neutral, while sometimes rooting for the other side.
I thought the Gulf War, in which the press was kept off the battlefield for the most part, was conducted correctly. Letting the press tag along behind, and accept the surrenders of Saddam's "elite" troops seemed the right way to do things.
The Pentagon surely remembers the lessons of Vietnam, and why they kept the press off the front lines last time. Therefore, I have been wondering why they would let these people interfere with their operations. I think I've figured it out though--
We want to scare the piss out of the world.
We want breathless accounts of the ease, horror and deadly efficiency with which we wage this war. We want live interviews with just-captured Iraqi soldiers describing their shock. We want it to be seen in Riyadh and Tehran and Beijing. That's what those 500 people are for.
Rumsfeld is damn shrewd.
It's heartening to read how strong the resolve is among all of you. I don't think we have an easy road ahead, and even if we're victorious in Iraq, we're going to have a lot of hurt kids coming back with nerve damage and all. Let's each swear an oath to keep after our presidents and congresscritters for the rest of our lives making sure these brave soldiers get their VA benefits.
One more thought: it looks like the appeasers/peaceniks are going to be defended without their express permission. Again!