The U.S. has plans to attack Iran!!!
I saw a version of that headline, albeit a more responsible iteration, I will admit, on Yahoo news. The actual headline read “Joint Chiefs chairman: U.S. has Iran strike plan, just in case.” The AP story acknowledges there’s nothing new in the Adm. Mike Mullin’s statement. It’s been the standard line for years regarding Iran, that while the military option remains on the table, it is a unpalatable, last resort. And in his “Meet the Press” interview Adm. Mullen even admits he thinks a strike against Iran is probably a bad idea.
The fact is the Pentagon draws up contingency plans for almost every conceivable scenario. If fact, it would be irresponsible if military planners didn’t prepare for the possible of military action against Iran. When the President says, “What are our options?” there better be some. But there is a big difference between “having plans” (as in on the shelf) and “plans to” (as in a strike is likely, sooner than later.)
The AP’s got the story right, once you get past the sexy headline. But this kind of thing is an easy way to grab some attention. The essential element of tabloid journalism is to state the ordinary in extraordinary terms, to write a story that while technically true is totally, and often deliberately, misleading.
One master of this disingenuous technique is none other than Pulitzer prize-winning journalist Sy Hersh, whose 2006 report in the The New Yorker was a classic example portraying this kind of routine planning as evidence of impending war. The report, quoting questionable secondhand sources such as “government consultants” and “former defense officials” was cleverly written and carefully nuanced so that when no attack materialized, Hersh could say he only suggested an attack was possible, not inevitable.
It’s a tabloid trick as old as the profession. You would think people would stop falling for it. So I’m thinking probably AP felt it HAD to write something about Mullen’s statement, just to provide context, lest it become tabloid fodder again.
