Media Show... Or Success?

[Update: Reports are conflicting. While the original stories below paint a less serious view of the assault, the LA Times is reporting that the Operation "has led to the capture of a possible ringleader of the bombing of the Gold Mosque" and that it's "resulted in 48 arrests and the discovery of at least six weapons caches consisting of mortars, AK-47s and insurgent training manuals". I hope that the LA Times is correct- we could use all the successes we can get at this stage.]

Many are affirming what we suspected... the airstrikes in Iraq were just more PR for the photo-op presidency.

Time magazine has an article on the assault:
On Scene: How Operation Swarmer Fizzled-

Not a shot was fired, or a leader nabbed, in a major offensive that failed to live up to its advance billing

...The press, flown in from Baghdad to this agricultural gridiron northeast of Samarra, huddled around the Iraqi officials and U.S. Army commanders who explained that the "largest air assault since 2003" in Iraq using over 50 helicopters to put 1500 Iraqi and U.S. troops on the ground had netted 48 suspected insurgents, 17 of which had already been cleared and released...

...But contrary to what many many television networks erroneously reported, the operation was by no means the largest use of airpower since the start of the war. ("Air Assault" is a military term that refers specifically to transporting troops into an area.) In fact, there were no airstrikes and no leading insurgents were nabbed in an operation that some skeptical military analysts described as little more than a photo op. What’s more, there were no shots fired at all and the units had met no resistance, said the U.S. and Iraqi commanders...

Time magazine's Chris Albritton also adds his own thoughts-

“Operation Swarmer” is really a media show. It was designed to show off the new Iraqi Army — although there was no enemy for them to fight. Every American official I’ve heard has emphasized the role of the Iraqi forces just days before the third anniversary of the start of the war. That said, one Iraqi role the military will start highlighting in the next few days, I imagine, is that of Iraqi intelligence. It was intel from the Iraqi military intelligence and interior ministry that the U.S. says prompted this Potemkin operation. And it will be the Iraqi intel that provides the cover for American military commanders to throw up their hands and say, “well, we thought bad guys were there.”

It’s hard to blame the military, however. Stations like Fox and CNN have really taken this and ran with it, with fancy graphics and theme music, thanks to a relatively slow news day. The generals here also are under tremendous pressure to show off some functioning Iraqi troops before the third anniversary, and I won’t fault them for going into a region loaded for bear. After all, the Iraqi intelligence might have been right.

But Operation Overblown should raise serious questions about how good Iraqi intelligence is. ... So I guess it’s fitting that on the eve of the third anniversary of a war launched on — oh, let’s be generous — “faulty” intelligence, a major operation is hyped and then turns out to be less than what it appeared because of … faulty intelligence.

The media seriously needs to start asking more questions. Isn't that their job?