COUNTERCOLUMN: All Your Bias Are Belong to Us

Sometimes reading reporting in the paper has got to be like reading some reporter's commentary on the Kasparov v. Deep Blue matches or Fischer v. Spassky chess matches.

The reporter can know the moves. And he can even know the openings. But chess played at the professional level is deeper, more layered, and more profound than the reporter comprehends.

From the New York Times:

The American soldiers know that circumstances erupt in which a second's hesitation can mean death, and say civilian deaths are a regrettable but inevitable consequence of a war in which suicide bombers have been the insurgents' most deadly weapon. But Iraqis say they have no clear idea of American engagement rules, and accuse the American command of failing to disseminate the rules to the public, in newspapers or on radio and television stations.

URL: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/07/international/middleeast/07patrols.html

Our hearts of course go out to the families of those who have been killed or wounded in cases of mistaken identity. But anybody who's complaining that coaltion forces have not publicly broadcast their exact criteria for engagement is either a terrorist or stupid.

We don't discuss rules of engagement. We aren't going to discuss rules of engagement. It's just not going to happen. And we sure as Hell aren't going to publish them in Arabic.

Nobody's out there shooting reporters or any other noncombatant on purpose. And nobody wants to see any Iraqis die who don't have it coming to them.

It's not a matter of unclear rules of engagement. It might be a matter of unclear marking, or unclear signage at TCPs. And it might be a matter of better lighting at night. But remember that if you light up a TCP like a Christmas tree, you also illuminate it for the enemy, too, who can fire at from darkness, or use the glow on the horizon to register their mortar tubes. And then civilians will get killed anyway.

Further, if you post signage too far forward, then the insurgents who ARE driving truck bombs get a chance to turn around and go back before they reach the checkpoint. In daylight that's pretty obvious when they do that with a properly set up TCP. (You try to do it around a corner or on a reverse slope so they're within small arms range already if they try to turn around.) But it's a lot less obvious when they do so at night. And if a VBEID escapes a checkpoint because of that, you'll never know. But you will sure as hell know the next day when you read the headlines about 50 people killed by a suicide bomb that should have been stopped the day before.

These risks and rewards are constantly being played off against one another. Rules of engagement change subtly with new intelligence and in response to emerging enemy tactics, and can change from one area to another in response to enemy practices and threats. Baghdad doesn't neccessarily know everything that Mosul or Ramadi is doing. Emerging doctrine is a fearful and wonderful thing.

And equally importantly, whether a round is launched downrange can also depend a lot on the sentiment of the soldiers. A unit that's taken casualties recently is going to react differently, and interpret information differently than a unit in a quiet area.

Sometimes, people who write about chess for a living are better off just reporting the moves. Often, good chess writers will insert a paragraph like "(not P-K6?? because ...B-N4, followed by ...R-Q8 and the pressure on white's backward pawn becomes unbearable.)"

But for the most part, they can write the moves, and the people who are equipped to understand will understand. Chess masters must get pretty frustrated with hack chess writers. (Just as financial professionals scratch their heads at the silliness in the financial press, and lawyers chuckle at reporters who try to write about the law.)

War reporting is tough. You can't just show up and expect to be competent. Soldiers work at their craft just as lawyers do, and just as professional chess players do. It takes time and it takes a lot of homework.


Splash, out

Jason