The media and the Iran buildup

“It is well that war is so terrible, otherwise we should grow too fond of it.”
 — Robert E. Lee

But what if war was terrible mostly for some other people? People far away. What would that look like?

We see these beautiful pictures at night from the decks of these two US Navy vessels in the eastern Mediterranean. I am tempted to quote the great Leonard Cohen — ”I’m guided by the beauty of our weapons.” And they are beautiful pictures of fearsome armaments making what is for them a brief flight over to this airfield.
 — Brian Williams on The 11th Hour, MSNBC, April 6, 2017, commenting on videos of the launch of a missile attack on a Syrian airbase

Let us first stipulate our gratitude and jaw-dropping admiration for the people who volunteer for the armed services. They enlist knowing they will face risks that the rest of us hope never to experience. They do that for us.

Then let’s ask if it shouldn’t be harder — more deliberative — to put these treasured members of our community — our neighbors, friends, family — in harm’s way.

War drums for Iran are unmistakable right now, but with no stated — or otherwise discernible — rationale, the U.S. posture screams recklessness. Media analyst Dan Froomkin posted thoughts on the questions the press ought to be - and is not - asking about the U.S. military buildup in that region:

Donald Trump may well be careening into a major war, and the American corporate media coverage is credulous, stenographic, and feeble when it should be vigorously alerting the American people to how dangerous and counterproductive the war could be, to the lack of any reasoned argument in its favor, to how it would violate one of Trump’s key campaign promises, and to the fact that Trump has not received authorization from Congress as required by the Constitution.

American journalists are busy speculating on will-he-or-won’t he and dutifully noting the position of military assets. What they should be doing is asking Trump officials some essential questions on behalf of the public - and calling attention to the lack of answers.

Froomkin noted that while U.K.-based media, the Guardian and BBC, were questioning the reasoning, strategy, and legality of an attack, only MS NOW in this country had been similarly skeptical. For most U.S. news outlets, Trump will serve as the nation’s assignment editor and content-generator-in-chief, once again. There will be video. And memes.

At the cable networks, retired generals and admirals are on call. Bespoke theme music is likely in process. War may be hell for some, but ratings beckon.

As CBS Chairman Les Moonves famously said at the time of Trump’s 2016 campaign, “It may not be good for America, but it’s damn good for CBS.”

“Man, who would have expected the ride we’re all having right now? … The money’s rolling in and this is fun,” Moonves said. “I’ve never seen anything like this, and this is going to be a very good year for us. Sorry. It’s a terrible thing to say. But, bring it on, Donald. Keep going.”

Moonves may have been thoughtless in his candor, but the comment offers a view of the economic waters in which traditional television journalism swims.

The Pentagon is aware.

Whatever the other lessons of the Vietnam War — some learned, some maybe not, some forgotten — American administrations adopted as a first principle that wars, in addition to being fought, have to be packaged to show the nation. As a result, the Pentagon has become a savvy content provider, with great visuals: nighttime skies alight with explosions, missile-eye views of strikes on targets.

As we saw with the recent military action in Venezuela, those visuals provide exciting - excited - coverage on television news.

But the geopolitical situation with Iran is fraught. Both Iran and the United States are politically unstable. Iran is a meddling neighbor to some, a mortal enemy to Israel. U.S. interference in Iranian domestic politics is legend, and the U.S. reneging on the 2015 nuclear agreement with Iran makes our country a distrusted party in negotiations.

And since Froomkin wrote his piece a week ago, we now see more pushback in this country — from the Pentagon itself, as Axios and the Wall Street Journal reported Monday.

According to the Journal, “The Pentagon is raising concerns to President Trump about an extended military campaign against Iran, advising that war plans being considered carry risks including U.S. and allied casualties, depleted air defenses and an overtaxed force.”

Coming from the Pentagon, that story is an alarm bell in the night. Whether it will be heeded by the White House remains to be seen.