Why, exactly, did we jump into Kandahar?

I don't actually want that question answered, I'm a great believer in OPSEC. But I've got the ugly feeling that I wouldn't like it.

What occurred was a classic "Air/Land Battle 2000" raid. The area was saturation bombed then a large group of Rangers landed on and took Kandahar airport. Last a group of spec-ops, probably Green Beanies, was inserted and performed an apparently flawless raid on an empty building.

One of three or four things drove the operation. Either they constructed an elaborate plan to land on the Afghani leadership, and it flew the coop too early (shades of Son Tay.) Or SOCOM decided that it should perform some psychological operations on the Afghanis by saying, effectively, "we can go anywhere, any time and do anything we want to." Or we thought there was some hard physical intel, what we used to refer to as "Essential Elements of Information" in the building. Or somebody in the chain of command said "we're losing the media battle to anthrax, let's pick a really soft target and jump some Rangers on it." Or some of all of the above with a little live fire training thrown in.

But I'm getting the unpleasant suspicion, based upon a wide variety of lack of useful intel being leaked, that it was mostly the "media battle." In reality, there was no reason for the Pentagon to confirm the operation at all. Unless it was a CNN raid.

In which case it was a lousy op.

Don't get me wrong, from the point of view of this former wind-dummy, any chance for somebody to get a jump star is a reason to have a jump. I'm not even worried about the "putting people in harms way" aspect; they wanted to be there, trust me on that one. But I wish there had been some sort of noticeable and likely target. Since nothing has turned up after a week, I have the unpleasant suspicion that what we just had was a badly constructed "CNN Operation."

You know what I mean by CNN Operations. CNN Operations are where the SEAL team doesn't know until the last minute where they are going to be landing. And CNN is there with cameras. A CNN Operation is when bombers drop a string of 2000 lb. bombs on an abandoned factory that just happens to be near a news crew. Or, notably, blowing up an aspirin factory.

If it was a CNN operation, it was directed not at the Afghanis (most of whom don't have any form of communication other than rumor) but at the American people. It was our "Doolittle Raid." In the darkest days of WWII in the Pacific, Jimmy Doolittle took out a small group of B-25 bombers and performed a militarily insignificant attack on Japan. It was, however, a propaganda coup for Roosevelt.

However, as a CNN operation, it was poorly conceived and executed and the follow-through was lousy. And that's what bugs the heck out of me.

First there was no person as a focal point. The Doolittle Raid had Doolittle . There was no "that's classified operational data." The guy was put up on a stage, given a medal and a hearty handshake and then sent around the country to talk at every rotary luncheon in the nation.

With this one, they wouldn't even trot out a single Ranger. It would not be the end of civilization to bring out some nice, young, handsome Ranger and have him give details about "killing ragheads." Frankly, 99.9% of "flyover country" would be hanging on every word. This assumes you can find a Ranger who can string a coherent sentence, but…

Second there was no conflict. As far as we can tell from the information given out and leaked, there was no-one wounded, on either side, in the operation. Nobody died from "shots fired in anger." If you're going to have a CNN op, get some pictures of dead Taliban. The only people it will offend are offended already. And if you don't bring back pictures of dead bodies, as far as the American people care the operation was a bust. Get a clue from Jerry Bruckheimer; he's all we know about war.

Last, and speaking of pictures, there was no visual element to the operation at all . Bad, bad, bad. Pictures of the jump are all well and good, but some really boss video of tracer fire or some Afghani bodies, preferably with identifiable weapons, would have gone over great. It wouldn't have been hard to arrange, send in a spare RTO with a small camera mounted on the side of his helmet and orders to get some video. There were, I guarantee you, at least three strap-hangers on bird one. Fine guys, but along mostly because they could be rather than through operational need.

The point is that while I would prefer we avoid CNN operations, if we're going to engage in them at least do them well . Or don't do them at all.

By the way, if you need a volunteer for the next jump…