I’m noticing the media gets tunnel vision for whatever they happen to be seeing from their own cameras, sources, or even Iraqi TV. For example, when we lost an Apache yesterday some pundits were asking why we’re sending Apaches in against the hunkered-down division where they so vulnerable when we can send in the MOAB (Mother of All Bombs, a massive 21,000-pound conventional weapon) instead. Duh, because that’s what Apaches are for; it’s a dangerous mission and that we only lost one, and even then the crew survived, speaks well of it. The MOAB, on the other hand, is so big that it has to pushed out the back of a slow-moving cargo plane. If you think Apaches are vulnerable, a cargo plane is a big, fat, juicy target. Plus, there is the fact the MOAB is still an experimental weapon. They only just tested it a couple of weeks ago.
The usual US strategy is to use a variety of tactics and assets to accomplish a goal. That means massive bombardments by B-52s, precision strikes by fighters, close-in strikes by helicopters, and then once the enemy is significantly degraded, we send in the ground troops. But because the media isn’t privy to the operational planning, they can only react to what’s happening in front of them and too often they ignore their own military analysts who are cautioning them not to jump to conclusions.