Iraq's a Lost Cause? Ask the Real Experts(Excellent News!)

LOS ANGELES TIMES ^ | November 23, 2005 | MAX BOOT

[kellynla]

WHEN IT COMES to the future of Iraq, there is a deep disconnect between those who have firsthand knowledge of the situation — Iraqis and U.S. soldiers serving in Iraq — and those whose impressions are shaped by doomsday press coverage and the imperatives of domestic politics.

A large majority of the American public is convinced that the liberation of Iraq was a mistake, while a smaller but growing number thinks that we are losing and that we need to pull out soon. Those sentiments are echoed by finger-in-the-wind politicians, including many — such as John Kerry, Harry Reid, John Edwards, John Murtha and Bill Clinton — who supported the invasion.

Yet in a survey last month from the U.S.-based International Republican Institute, 47% of Iraqis polled said their country was headed in the right direction, as opposed to 37% who said they thought that it was going in the wrong direction. And 56% thought things would be better in six months. Only 16% thought they would be worse.

American soldiers are also much more optimistic than American civilians. The Pew Research Center and the Council on Foreign Relations just released a survey of American elites that found that 64% of military officers are confident that we will succeed in establishing a stable democracy in Iraq. The comparable figures for journalists and academics are 33% and 27%, respectively. Even more impressive than the Pew poll is the evidence of how our service members are voting with their feet. Although both the Army and the Marine Corps are having trouble attracting fresh recruits — no surprise, given the state of public opinion regarding Iraq — reenlistment rates continue to exceed expectations. Veterans are expressing their confidence in the war effort by signing up to continue fighting.

[Flying Circus]

I wouldn't count on that. The general public has a short memory and the major media will be re-writing history with lies and half truths the whole way.

By the time they are done telling it, Bush will still be a liar but the Democrats will have transformed "Bush's folly" into the "New Iraq". The Democrat who makes president around that time will be hailed as he leads our military into one fiasco after another- each one billed as the next Iraq with every possible justification, no matter how small, given. Big media will spew Democrat talking points and lie, people will claim not to listen but the popular opinion and conventional wisdom will be molded.

[knews_hound]

This is just too funny.

Just as we are about to win, the Dems try to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory yet again.

Like this http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1527405/posts?page=1

Cheers,

knews hound

http://knewshound.blogspot.com/

[Just A Nobody]

Wonder if my kids'll show a little more respect?

In time, Sir, in due time.

Meanwhile, Thank you for your service - I support you and your troops.

[Names Ash Housewares]

"Well we reeeeeely need to shout this good news from the roof tops!
The troops read all the negative reporting from the MSM and it definitely affects their morale!"

Dont worry, I was being a little sarcastic. I personally sponsor care packages, write notes letting them know how much we are behind them. We cant count on the MSM to let them know how we feel. we must do it ourselves to be sure.

[kellynla]

And we appreciate all your support.
As one who can testify from past experience, there is no better morale booster for a Marine or Soldier in combat than mail and care packages.

Thanks again!

Semper Fi,
Kelly

[kellynla]

Viet Nam all over again...

Just remember the Viet Nam war was lost in America not in Viet Nam!

Semper Fi,
Kelly

[r9etb]

C-SPAN would cover it. So would all the blogs. The MSM is being bypassed more and more every month.

C-SPAN already covers this stuff, as do the blogs. In great detail, even. And yet we're still in this pickle. Why? Because the vast majority of people get their info (if they get it at all) from the MSM, not from C-SPAN and blogs, and that's unlikely to change.

But the Bush WH seems to want to play the Beltway game. They don't get it.

I think it's you who don't get it. You can't blame the Bush WH for this. Folks like us -- FReepers who pay attention to this stuff in the first place -- are a small minority. Most people get their info on Iraq by osmosis ... they glance at a headline passing by the news stand, see it on the Yahoo! news blurb on their way to the NBA scores, or hear a teaser on the CBS evening news. They don't bother to learn the details -- they essentially trust what the MSM is giving them.

[MikeA]

"Yet in a survey last month from the U.S.-based International Republican Institute, 47% of Iraqis polled said their country was headed in the right direction, as opposed to 37% who said they thought that it was going in the wrong direction."

That's better than the number of whiney ass Americans who have never had it so good saying their country is going in the right direction, with something like 60% inexplicably saying we're off on the wrong track. But then again, those polls all over-represent Democrats relative to their actual numbers in the voting population.

[SuziQ]

The media is trying desperately to re-create their 'Anti-Vietnam' glory, and it ain't working. The networks and the major newspapers have big competition now in the form of radio and the Internet.

People may not have been able to keep in close touch with their soldiers in the war in past years, but the soldiers today can send e-mail to let family members know how they're doing and how things are going in their areas of operation. These family members then spread the word among family and friends, and who will they be more inclined to believe, the media, or an eye-witness they know personally?

[SuziQ]

Why the heck is the Bush Admin and Bush himself so lame at communicating this? Every month Bush should go to a joint session of Congress and give them there requested "update". Seriously, use charts, graphics, photos and whatever else is needed to drum beat this into the think skulls of the American people -- bypassing the MSM!

If the networks decided not to cover the event, how are the American people supposed to see it?

[angkor]

Because the vast majority of people get their info (if they get it at all) from the MSM, not from C-SPAN and blogs, and that's unlikely to change.

Uh huh.

That's why Republicans now control the White House, the House, the Senate, and the majority of governorships and legislatures, despite the Republican Party's traditionally atrocious PR efforts (e.g., "the Stupid Party").

What do you think enabled the sea change beginning in 1994? Seriously, tell me.

[baystaterebel]

""Why the heck is the Bush Admin and Bush himself so lame at communicating this? Every month Bush should go to a joint session of Congress and give them there requested "update". Seriously, use charts, graphics, photos and whatever else is needed to drum beat this into the think skulls of the American people -- bypassing the MSM!""

I had a conversation with my mother in law about this very subject. Both of us are staunch Republicans, both of us support President Bush but neither of us can figure out why this President, nor his supposed political mastermind Karl Rove, have waited so long to get out in front of this story.

The problems solved by just speaking the truth would go far beyond poll numbers. It would help embolden the limp spined Republicans in the senate and force the RINOS of the bunch to tow the line or get left behind.

The media would also be forced to report the truth if they were confronted with facts every time they report false figures, facts, and statements. Every time a Republican is in front of a camera with a democrat or a liberal reporter the Republicans should be beating the snot out of them with the facts and should not stop swinging until they are bloodied by the truth.

[r9etb]

You seem to be assuming that everybody goes the extra step to get the details, in the same way you do. They do not. They get their information in dribs and drabs, primarily from the MSM.

The sea change in 1994 was a "dribs and drabs" success for the Republicans, who were lucky enough to have Bill Clinton very publicly pushing noxious ideas, with the MSM enthusiastically pushing his agenda for him. Most people viscerally disliked the agenda. If you want the counter-example, look at the impeachment proceedings in 1998.

[angkor]

You didn't answer my question: what enabled the sea change that now has almost all major bodies of U.S. government controlled by Republicans?

Revulsion toward Bill Clinton? Really? You give him that much power?

OK, fine. What started the Bill Clinton impeachment? (Clue: www.drudgereport.com).

What was responsible for the defeat of John F'n Kerry? (Clue: www.swiftvets.com)

Other examples abound, you just aren't noticing it.

[pogo101]

Kelly, what is an efficient(*) organization that takes cash donations and sends care packages to in-theater troops? I'm sure they'd do a better job than we could of assuring that actual EDIBLE goodies arrived.

(*-- as in, the money doesn't get bled out through administrative and fundraising costs)

[ceoinva]

Don't agree. Can be done. Reagan and slick Willy did it. It would take effort by Bush since he is such a poor communicator but he could at least get the message out directly to his consitituencies and get support for war etc. up to 50% or so.

[ceoinva]

Feed he non-MSM media. Its MUCH bigger than MSM.

[VOA]

American soldiers are also much more optimistic than American civilians.

Because...
1. They don't have all day to sit around listening to ABC/CBS/NBC/CNN
reporters trying to bag Pulitzer Prizes for doing a repeat of their
effort to help the enemy win during the Vietnam War.
AND, perhaps more importantly...
2. They are on the ground and actually know what's going on.

[kellynla]

"Kelly, what is an efficient(*) organization that takes cash donations and sends care packages to in-theater troops? I'm sure they'd do a better job than we could of assuring that actual EDIBLE goodies arrived.

(*-- as in, the money doesn't get bled out through administrative and fundraising costs)"


Pogo, understandably I am partial to "MarineParents.com"
http://www.marineparents.com

[lilylangtree]

I like this one that was posted a few days ago:

In the Body Count War: U.S. Wins 25-1
usnews.com ^ | 11-20-05

Frustrated GOP lawmakers are desperate for President Bush to do more to show how troops are winning the war in Iraq, and Indiana Rep. Mike Pence has an idea: Tell how many insurgents the U.S. troops are killing, not just the American death toll. "This is football season," says the Republican, who takes time to mourn with constituents who lose family members in combat. "People want to know if we're winning or losing . . . what's the score." Fresh from a trip to Iraq, Pence says he knows the score: just over 2,000 Americans dead, compared with 50,000 to 60,000 enemy combatants.