The New York Times wins again!

[JD82]

I found this article detailing the Bush administration's denial of an Israeli request to attack Iran's nuclear weapons development program. The best part about the article is it annunciates and describes in detail an ongoing covert program to delay or possibly derail the program. I consider this another fine example of NYC journalism and its relentless quest to have the best stories at the expense of national security. Not that the Iranians aren't paranoid in their very nature and are probably aware of such efforts, but can't these vultures refrain from putting it out in the open like it's a public service announcement?

[URL="[URL="[URL="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/11/washington/11iran.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&sq=Israel%20Iran&st=cse&scp=1"]

[Basenshukai]

Which is why I am not a fan of embedded journalists either. They are all in it for their own Pulitzer. We Soldiers are in it for the mission and the lives of our fellow operators. We are waaay too different to sit in the same GMV, if you ask me.

[JD82]

There were plenty of journalists in Vietnam and in or around any military action we've taken since, but I don't remember this term "embedded" until this long war began. I honestly don't remember it until Iraqi Freedom. Is this term just a simpler way of saying that military units are now responsible for babysitting these reporters, where as before they were left to fend for themselves? It seems having one of these persons along now means added logistics and one more person to account for if stuff hits the fan.