Fighting to Win, or Not Fighting to be Nice?

The Obama Administration has been quite frank about its intention to do things different, to reset how America does business, and to extend olive branches to Muslim jihadists dedicated to our death.

We're now seeing from the Wall Street Journal that those policies mean announcing your intended targets by press release:

KANDAHAR, Afghanistan—In a rare break from traditional military secrecy, the U.S. and its allies are announcing the precise target of their first big offensive of the Afghanistan surge in an apparent bid to intimidate the Taliban.

Coalition officers have been hinting aloud for months that they plan to send an overwhelming Afghan, British and U.S. force to clear insurgents from the town of Marjah and surrounding areas in Helmand province, and this week the allies took the unusual step of issuing a press release saying the attack was "due to commence."

I'm not a military tactician by any means, but knowing where and when your opponent is going to attach means the enemy can choose among several options:

1. run, regroup and fight again, another time, another day
2. gather the resources to successfully fight against the U.S. forces at the pre-announced site
3. hit the U.S. forces at a location where its forces have been reduced (as they are in Helmand)
4. surrender because they are scared

The sad fact is that of all the options, number 4 is the least likely and this tactic of broadcasting our moves does nothing to end the ongoing threat from Taliban/Al Queda forces.

Our prayers go out to the men and women in unform under this Pacifist in Chief.