Posted on 01/19/2006 2:43:45 PM PST by churchillbuff
This week, a full and unconditional endorsement of Murtha’s notion has come from a completely unexpected source: the notably conservative Tribune-Review, which is based in Greensburg, Pa., but considers itself a full-fledged Pittsburgh newspaper. It’s controlled by Richard Mellon Scaife, one of the chief funders of conservative think-thanks and activist causes around the country.
Less than two months ago, the newspaper (daily circulation about 102,000), attacked Murtha’s plan. Printed below is the text of the latest editorial, which was published on Tuesday. Perhaps a few other papers would now like to re-visit this subject, with the third anniversary of the start of the war approaching.
*
We didn't agree with Jack Murtha in November when he called for an immediate withdrawal of United States forces from Iraq. The timing was not right. But the times have changed.
When the Pennsylvania congressman made his call, critical December parliamentary elections were ahead; cut-and-run talk was inappropriate.
But successful elections have passed. And contrary to what some may say, Iraqis are stepping up to the plate, as evidenced by the number dying in defense of their fledgling republic. Native Iraqi terrorists and those of the al-Qaida brand also are starting to battle each other.
There's a growing sense of self-determination, which is a critical trait on the road to democracy.
That said, the world situation has changed dramatically since November. The nuclear saber-rattling of neighboring Iran is heading for a showdown. To meet that threat should diplomacy fail, the United States must begin the six- to nine-month logistical process of drawing down its Iraqi force and repositioning it to respond, if need be, to the Iranian threat.
This is not retreat. This is not cut-and-run. This is a recognition of the reality in Iraq -- one that has evolved into an Iraqi problem that only the Iraqis now can solve -- and that the paramount world security threat now is Iran.
On CBS's "60 Minutes" Sunday night, Jack Murtha predicted the "vast majority" of U.S. troops will be out of Iraq by year's end if not sooner. We hope he's right. The time has come.
You forgot the barf alert.
Could it be that the media moguls think that losing the oil from the Persian Gulf will create a mind-numbing, technologically devastating depression that will bring back the world of "print"?
Naw, even newsies couldn't be that greedy could they?
Uh, any 'withdrawal' will have nothing to do with newspaper folderol or Jack Murtha. It is already happening as part of the ongoing plan. These people would call for the sun to come up in the morning...and take credit when it does.
Repostiton for Iran? Do these folks know its just next door to Iraq? What better staging area than the country next door?
Unless they got sunburned, in which case they would blame Bush.
Buchananites?
Too bad they are advocating an assinine position that won't happen. Sounds like the NY Times.
This is exactly right. The idiotic MSM refused or was just too plain stupid to ask the great Murtha some simple question when he recently predicted that the majority of troops would be out by the end of the year - "Cong. Murtha, if you believe that's the case, then why a big annoucement by you that the troops should be strategically redeployed? Weren't you simply calling for what you knew was going to happen, anyway? Was this part of a democratic plan to take credit for the inevetible troop withdrawal when it happens?"
He should have done something really bold, like demand we hold a Presidential election by 2008 and GWB not be allowed to be a candidate!
?
We have troops in Iraq.
As in troops, and aircraft and weapons, right next door to Iran.
If we have to go to war, would it really make sense to pack everything up, give up our bases, come back to the states, so we could re-deploy all over again?
We have instant attack capability and rapid reaction response avalable to us.
We have a structural advantage maintaining the status quo should the need for military action against Iran occur.
We can quickly escalate if the threat elevates, and do so immediatly.
I agree with us using slow withdrawal, so as not to set a timetable, so the terrorists don't try to wait us out and so that we can finish the mission.
But pulling out, so that we can go back again, is amazingly stupid.
I thought "withdrawal" was our ultimate goal. The only difference between the article and what the President says is centered around the timeframe. Leave it to the liberals to try to spin any troop reduction into a liberal victory.
I believe you have it right. Withdrawals WILL happen this year....but we will keep a force in place.
I guess this was published before the Bin Laden tape today?
It' so very special that Murtha and the editorial writer both agree with Osama bin Laden's latest pronouncement. Isn't it?
I read this paper everyday and I was very dissapointed by the editorial. This is a "rush to judgement" view over Iran rattling its sabre. I thought the editors at the trib would react like thinking conservatives instead of emotional libs.
Yes it is. You put a dress on the pig but it's still a pig. And not much of a dress either.
"That said, the world situation has changed dramatically since November. The nuclear saber-rattling of neighboring Iran is heading for a showdown. To meet that threat SHOULD DIPLOMACY FAIL, the United States must begin the six- to nine-month logistical process of drawing down its Iraqi force and repositioning it to respond, if need be, to the Iranian threat."
I'm visiting my friend who has a broken leg and her neighbor starts making threatening pronouncements and acting in a threatening manner toward me, and I'm going to leave?
I DON'T THINK SO
Am I correct in assuming editor and publisher goes online to all subscribers?
And that we can expect other newspapers to pick up the white flag?
If so, I'd like to get me letter to the editor done.
and Hillary wants to hit Iran.
because Murtha called her afraid.
I wish someone would lock them all up.
They're all going to get us killed.
They sure liked to call Bush's actions unilateral.
Barf alert indeed.
E&P is part of the vast-left-winglamestream-media consensus, and they constantly attack conservative and Bush ideas and agendas, and they beat the drum of Iraq defeatism constantly.
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.