Current US anti-Al Qaeda strategy -- why so loud?

The first paragraph isn't so good: does America not see a possible weakness in "loudly signaling its intent to step up covert operations"?

Perhaps I shouldn't post after reading two lines and before thinking.

Actually, much of this is new to me - SOCOM, the Department of Homeland Security: what are these things? Why are the CIA and FBI being sidelined. The stuff about shouting your intentions to scare countries into doing some of the work for you sounds very plausible, but I wonder how much substance there is behind the threats - after all, why would covert anti-al-Qaeda work not have been happening for the last year? Might there be some desperation in there, some bluff, hoping that havens might close, that terrorists might be flushed out who they couldn't get otherwise? That theory sounds very plausible indeed - almost certain, I'd say.

Numerical weakness comes from having to prepare against possible attacks; numerical strength, from compelling our adversary to make these preparations against us. - Sun Tzu

not that the us would have to worry about numerical weakness, if it only knew where to find al-qa'ida. doesn't mean they wouldn't try to turn the tables in the psyops stakes, though.

because talking loud looks good in preempting any domestic political debate on how the issue is being handled. It gives the illusion that they are in control. It's psy-ops on the American people.... kinda like the War on Drugs, when a lot of the drug trafficking can be traced to CIA activity, but it looks nice to grab pushers and users to throw in prison, as well as spray a few fields of plants.