What the military will say to a reporter and what is said behind closed doors are two very different things - especially when it comes to the U.S. military in Africa.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
There's a very particular way that the military speaks. There's a lot of profanity and a lot of acronyms.
Our embedded reporters during the war agreed to guidelines established by the military.
The Obama presidency has seen the U.S. military's elite tactical forces increasingly used in an attempt to achieve strategic goals. But with Special Operations missions kept under tight wraps, Americans have little understanding of where their troops are deployed, what exactly they are doing, or what the consequences might be down the road.
We citizens don't need to know every detail of every military operation in this new kind of war. Nor should the media tell us and hence our enemy.
When you are covering a life-or-death struggle, as British reporters were in 1940, it is legitimate and right to go along with military censorship, and in fact in situations like that there wouldn't be any press without the censorship.
What firefighters and people in our military and cops do is separate from what the rest of us do; basically these people say, 'I'm going to protect all these strangers.'
Any information about U.S. special operations forces is highly sensitive.
We're so used to using military terminology in civilian speech that we forget those terms might mean something very specific.
Wars tend to be very public things, they are visible. There are correspondents traveling with the troops and you get daily dispatches.
Things said to a reporter in confidence should be kept in confidence.
No opposing quotes found.