Posted on 06/26/2005 3:23:22 PM PDT by smoothsailing
Progress in Iraq Takes Back Seat to Violence in Media, Rumsfeld Says
By Petty Officer 3rd Class John R. Guardiano, USN
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, June 26, 2005
The "solid progress" being made in Iraq seldom gets the same level of media attention as terrorist killings and beheadings there, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said today.
Moreover, the Iraqi people, he argued, are winning against the insurgency and, with the help of American and coalition forces, will prevail. "The fact of the matter is that the progress has been solid," Rumsfeld told George Stephanopoulos on the ABC News program "This Week."
"It's amazing, it's historic, what's taken place," he said. "Twenty-five million Iraqi people have been liberated, and they have now have a sovereign government. And they've had a successful election, and the hospitals and the schools are open, and they're making good progress on developing a constitution. And they're going to have a final election in December of this year."
Yet, none of these facts are well known to the American public, the secretary said. "They're not as newsworthy, apparently, because (they) don't get reported as much," Rumsfeld said. "What gets reported is that 10 Iraqis are killed (by) a suicide bomber, or an American soldier is killed."
The secretary said this is not the media's fault; it's just the nature of wartime reporting.
"War is a tough, difficult, dirty business," he explained. "And when it's reported, it leaves people with the impression -- correctly -- that it's a terrible thing. It's everybody's last choice, nobody's first choice."
Rumsfeld said this has been true throughout American history. "We know that this has been true in the Revolutionary War. We know it was true in the Civil War. We know it was true in World War I and World War II," he said. "If all people know is what they see on television or read in the press -- the negatives," he explained, then they don't see the progress that is being made.
Army Gen. John Abizaid, commander of U.S. Central Command, and Army Gen. George W. Casey Jr., commander of Multinational Force Iraq, are the people with the most direct knowledge of what's transpiring in Iraq, and they "feel very good about the progress that's being made," Rumsfeld said.
Casey told the Senate Armed Services Committee last week that only "one-tenth of 1 percent" of Iraqis are involved in the insurgency.
"For those of us who have spent many months in the field," Abizaid told the committee, "we see good progress in both Iraq and Afghanistan. We sense good progress against the extremism that once seemed so pervasive in the region. ... Progress in counterinsurgency and counter-terrorist work is not easily recognized. Setbacks, casualties and difficult problems undoubtedly remain ahead. ... We will need patience and strength to achieve success."
But while negative media coverage of war has been the historic norm, television and the modern media may have exacerbated the problem in recent history.
On the NBC News program "Meet the Press" with Tim Russert, the secretary noted that according to historian David McCullough, author of a new book titled "1776," if the American Revolutionary War had had the same type of media coverage as the Iraq war, then "there wouldn't have been a successful revolution."
As far as Iraq is concerned, "the progress is impressive," Rumsfeld said. "I think they're going to choose the path of lightness. The sweep of human history is for freedom. Look at what's happened in Lebanon and Kyrgyzstan and the Ukraine."
The secretary said the American people can be optimistic about a good outcome in Iraq, but the optimism must be tempered with an understanding of reality. "We have to recognize that it's a tough, tough, tough world, and there are going to be bumps in the road between now and then," he said.
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Jun2005/20050626_1855.html
A car bomb will always make more news than the repair of a water main. What do they expect even if bias wasn't a part of the equation?
Th SecDEF concedes your point in the article.
Coalition must create own stronger media !
When the President said "bring it on" he invited coverage of every single attack by the insurgency.
The way the news is reported together with the editorialists analyzing it suggests that everything is regressing and that no progress is taking place. Such nonsense is so because the editorial writers in such places as the Minneapolis Star and Tribune enjoy any possible way to say the US is losing.
Then when you put it together with Guantanamo fiction from others that want the US to lose, all gets multiplied.
If positive news were to be reported in proper perspective, the gloom would dissipate. If news of attrocities were to be reported as they the crimes against humanity that they are, I think righteous anger would replace defeatism. If clown politicians would express some of the righteous anger that they should, the terror war would be a one we could win.
So if W hadn't said that they would have set up roadside lemonade stands?
“An American soldier was killed today in Iraq. What is going on over there?”
I believe it’s called “war”.
Would you prefer that he cower in a corner, blithering, "Please don't hurt us"?????
I think the Pentagon should start releasing combat videos showing how we are killing and capturing these terrorists on a daily basis.
That the media would be their enablers may not have occurred to him.
Since when are suicide bombers or people who plant roadside bombs not considered terrorists. All I am saying is that President Bush invited scrutiny of their response to his statement of "bring it on."
I grew up in Tidewater,How is it possible for a local station in the midst of all those military bases to be so clueless?
Ahhhhhhhhhhh...I think the media covers every single attack because of a long ago derived agenda to trash the current administration regardless of any lofty goals or purposes the administration pursues.
The media only pretends to care about the plight of those that suffer around the world...time to take "violent" actions against the media...four years of diplomacy with them sure hasn't worked.
"And I see that you have invited scrutiny of your response."
Bring it on(I couldn't resist)
Did the media give Nixon or Johnson a pass on coverage of events in Vietnam? I think both got clobbered and I think if a Democrat had brought us to war in Iraq they would be getting the same treatment that President Bush is getting.
Remarks by Rumsfeld on TV today.
It's Bush's fault.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.