Got a quote or two, to substantiate this assertion?
"In dozens of interviews with soldiers of the Army's 5th Battalion, 20th Infantry Regiment as they patrolled the streets of eastern Baghdad, many said the Iraqi capital is embroiled in civil warfare between majority Shiite Muslims and Sunni Arabs that no number of American troops can stop."
"Spc. Don Roberts, who was stationed in Baghdad in 2004, said the situation had gotten worse because of increasing violence between Shiites and Sunnis.
"I don't know what could help at this point," said Roberts, 22, of Paonia, Colo. "What would more guys do? We can't pick sides. It's almost like we have to watch them kill each other, then ask questions."
"Nothing's going to help. It's a religious war, and we're caught in the middle of it," said Sgt. Josh Keim, a native of Canton, Ohio, who is on his second tour in Iraq. "It's hard to be somewhere where there's no mission and we just drive around."
"Capt. Matt James, commander of the battalion's Company B, was careful in how he described the unit's impact since arriving in Baghdad.
"The idea in calling us in was to make things better here, but it's very complicated and complex," he said.
But James said more troops in combat would likely not have the desired effect.
"During a recent interview, Lt. Gen. Nasier Abadi, deputy chief of staff for the Iraqi army, said that instead of sending more U.S. soldiers, Washington should focus on furnishing his men with better equipment."
"Pfc. Richard Grieco said it's hard to see how daily missions in Baghdad make a difference.
"If there's a plan to sweep through Baghdad and clear it, (more troops) could make a difference," said the 19-year-old from Slidell, La. "But if we just dump troops in here like we've been doing, it's just going to make for more targets."
"Sgt. James Simons, 24, of Tacoma, Wash., said Baghdad is so dangerous that U.S. forces spend much of their time in combat instead of training Iraqis."
So is the MSM making all of this up out of whole cloth?
No. But they're cherry picking to support their anti-Iraq mission template.
And I'm not going to argue with a person on a conservative forum who DEFENDS the MSM.
I know you're on the same side as the left on this issue, Son, but I would think you'd be smart enough not to make it so obvious....
Well, from my recollection, it was the Kennedy administration that sent our first combat forces to Vietnam. As I recollect, they sent 5,000 combat troops, 1962. Of course, Johnson accelerated that commitment many times. [BREAK] "Johnson certainly added to our commitment in Vietnam. Whether Kennedy would have done the same, I can’t tell you because all he did was make our initial combat commitment. You can argue one way or another. But the only evidence I know is that the first 5,000 were a commitment by the Kennedy administration."
The headlines should read: Ford blames Democrats for the Vietnam war!!!!