Yearning for the "Bad Old Days" in Iraq

Discussion in 'Middle East - General' started by Adam's Apple, Oct 23, 2007.

  1. Adam's Apple
    Offline

    Adam's Apple Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2004
    Messages:
    4,092
    Thanks Received:
    445
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +447
    Missing the Story (on purpose!)
    By Jack Kelly, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
    October 21, 2007

    Nostalgia for the bad old days was also evident in the decision of The Washington Post to publish Tuesday an op-ed signed by 12 former U.S. Army captains deploring the situation in Iraq. Iraq's public infrastructure is in terrible shape, they said. Iraqi public officials are corrupt. U.S. troops just push insurgents from one place in the country to another. The Iraqi army and police are incapable of taking the insurgents on.

    "As Army captains who served in Baghdad and beyond, we've seen the corruption and the sectarian division," they said. "We understand what it's like to be stretched too thin. And we know when it's time to get out."

    I don't doubt the former soldiers are reflecting honestly what they saw when they were in Iraq. But of the 12, only two were in Iraq in 2006. Five others served in 2005. Three served in 2004. Two served last in 2003. None have been in Iraq since Gen. David Petraeus took command and the troop surge began.

    Things change in war. In October of 1942, the Nazis were winning World War II. By October of 1943, they were getting creamed. The situation in Iraq in October of 2007 is much different than it was when these former captains served there.

    If the goal of The Washington Post were to inform its readers of the situation in Iraq now, one would think its editors would make more of an effort to publish the views of soldiers and Marines who are serving in Iraq now. Perhaps the Post chose veterans whose information is old and stale because those serving in Iraq now might not say what the editors of The Washington Post would like to have you hear.

    for full article:
    www.post-gazette.com/pg/07294/826879-373.stm
     
  2. RetiredGySgt
    Offline

    RetiredGySgt Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    39,591
    Thanks Received:
    5,909
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ratings:
    +9,020
    The press only reports what it wants us to hear. Reality, facts, they do not matter. The left eats it up. Thousands of troops, enlisted and officer have no problem with the mission in Iraq and know we have turned a corner. The press is not interested in them, they would rather find 12 Captains with no first hand knowledge of the situation to make a point they support.

    And when the supporters speak out, they are shills for the Government. Sanchez was vilified by the press the whole time he was in command. Now they love him, of course they love him not for what he said but for what they can twist what he said into.
     
  3. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    Haven't you heard? The administration has been 'hiding' the good news, it's another conspiracy!

    http://www.mudvillegazette.com/archives/009568.html

     
  4. Warner
    Offline

    Warner Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2007
    Messages:
    138
    Thanks Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +16
    You people crack me up.

    You accuse various sources of only reporting what they want you to hear but you have plenty of sources reporting what you want to hear - and you ascribe those as being truthful while those reporting what you don't like are disreputable.

    The truth about Iraq is that the Surge has had little or no effect. The changes in Al Anbar province and a few other places are mostly due to policy changes which give power to (mostly Sunni) regional tribal leaders. These same tribal leaders asked for and were denied this arrangement THREE YEARS AGO because it conflicts with the US philosophy that Iraq should be a pure democracy and that we should not take sides or support sectarian militias.

    I want the war to go well too. But we have to be skeptical of deceptions, and that's what this is. The deck's been stacked to make the Surge appear to be effective whether or not it really is. In the mean time, we have effectively taken sides in Iraq's sectarian war and there will be consequences for this decision. In the short run we see the level of violence subside a little as the tribal militia's stop supporting the insurgency and especially Al Qeda. But in the long run this will infuriate the Shiite's and they will step up their side of the insurgency in response. This will also incite Iran to become more involved in their support of the Shiite's. These were the very reasons we chose not to support such sectarian tribal regional control in the first place.

    To make the surge look better the Bush Admin has chosen to make a deal with the devil. We all know how such deals work out in the end.
     

Share This Page