Edititorial: Thanks for Blowing the Navy's Operational Security, New York Times

% of readers think this story is Fact. Add your two cents.

“All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when we are able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must appear inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near.”

— Sun Tzu, The Art of War
 

Apparently, the Navy doesn’t need to worry about Pyongyang calling its bluff when The New York Times will do it for the dictatorship.
 

On April 8, as North Korea’s threats of war grew more belligerent, the Department of Defense announced that the USS Carl Vinson was headed to the Korean Peninsula. Many South Koreans and others cheered the decision, calling the move a powerful symbol of U.S. strength and resolve.

This past Tuesday, however, The New York Times breathlessly broke the news that the USS Carl Vinson wasn’t actually where the Department of Defense said it was. In fact, at the time, the carrier had been sailing in the opposite direction toward Australia. (It will be in the Western Pacific this week.) The Grey Lady was shocked that the Trump administration would give out false information regarding a ship’s movement and location.

Navy officials have declined to discuss the specific timing of operations because of security concerns.

It’s a good thing The New York Times didn’t know about the big military lie called Operation Fortitude. The 1944 operation was a massive deception by Allied Forces to convince the Germans that the long-expected invasion of Europe would take place at Pas-de-Calais, France or in Norway. Fortitude was implemented by intentionally letting the enemy obtain false classified information and by staging fake radio traffic, troop movements, and military equipment. The bluff worked.

Operations security is still a thing, and loose lips still sink ships.