Historically, surprise attacks are not really a surprise. There are generally precursors that were simply unrecognized at the time. A statement by the outgoing head of the fleet that would would be involved in an attack on Iran that the doubling of offensive and defensive capabiliites in the form of a second carrier is “not necessarily a precursor to offensive actions” is the kind of comment that betrays an impending attack. The story is a decent one, not headed for the inbox at the Pulitzer judges' desk. Yet it may be far more important than one that gets the prize later. In time we will see how important that statement was, and whether the reporter should have placed it higher in the story, or even have led with it. "Not ... More »

This is a good report of the current opinions of a US military leader. It is important as this person is being promoted from an active duty position in the Persian Gulf to an even more responsible position in Washington, DC. It is ONLY a report of this meeting with no analysis or perspective attempted. It is, therefore, both honest and a conduit for the message (propaganda?). Note the local paper and AP reports (linked) add little information or analysis.

This the strongest, most credible presentation of the U.S. viewpoint, much more believable than what has been presented by the administration. It is credible because it is detailed and contains no obvious lies, as is often true with administration spokesmen. The single weakness in this story that I see is the unchallenged U.S. claim that Iran is "fueling the anti-US insurgency in Iraq." It is well-documented that the major insurgency in Iraq is by Sunni Muslims who lost power when the Shi'ite majority ascended to power. This article fails to point out that most of the deaths in Iraq, particularly among Iraqis because they are the majority of victims but also Americans, are dead because of the Sunni insurgency, which is funded by ... More »