Yearning for the "Bad Old Days" in Iraq

[Adam's Apple]

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

 

[RetiredGySgt]

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.

 

[Annie]

Haven't you heard? The administration has been 'hiding' the good news, it's another conspiracy!

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

October 23, 2007
News Flash
Greyhawk

Want more evidence of victory in Iraq? Look no further than Newsweek's amazing attempt at spin:

The Bush administration is starving for good news out of Iraq, and it may finally have some: new U.S. government statistics showing that violent attacks of all kinds are down to levels not seen since 2005. But until recently, the administration appears to have resisted acknowledging a key element of the new data, because it flies in the face of President George W. Bush's ongoing rhetorical confrontation with Iran's clerical regime. According to three senior U.S. officials, who asked for anonymity when discussing sensitive information, the decline in Iraq violence also includes a decrease in the number of attacks attributable to insurgents backed or armed by Iran. Pentagon Press Secretary Geoff Morrell confirmed to NEWSWEEK that "there has indeed been a drop" in such attacks, but he added that "it's not entirely clear what the reason for that is."
​

Yes, ladies and gentlemen, the Bush administration has now been accused of trying to cover up good news from Iraq. The second paragraph just piles on the ignorance - with a shocking secret revealed:

Overall trends show a significant drop in violence over the last several months, according to previously unpublished military statistics obtained by NEWSWEEK. During a single week in mid-September, attacks in Iraq totaled about 900—down from about 1,700 a week in June. The number of attacks increased slightly in late September and early October during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan. But according to the statistics, the just-ended Ramadan holiday was significantly less violent this year than in the previous two years.​

I call on all mainstream media outlets everywhere to join Newsweek's effort to expose this massive coverup!!!!

...

 

[Warner]

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.