Posted on 03/15/2007 8:40:56 AM PDT by april15Bendovr
Edited on 03/15/2007 9:02:38 AM PDT by Sidebar Moderator. [history]
I found the video originally at Pundit Reviews blog posted March 12
http://www.punditreview.com/
It's a 9+ minute video. How about a synopsis?
It was on Washington Journal with Brian Lamb. The segment was awesome. She acknowledged evil.
"It's a 9+ minute video. How about a synopsis?"
Well worth listening to,very refreshing for a change... just save it for later.
"She acknowledged evil"
It must be tough for any journalist to acknowledged evil over in Iraq because many Democrats and journalists hear in America are enabling it.
OK, I'll watch it during lunch break or when I get home this eve. thx
So...you fixed the spelling? =;^)
Sorry make that here and not hear
It happens :0)
The spelling was a disaster originally and I needed help from the moderator to save my dumb ass. I put my fingers in motion before I put my brain in gear.
Would that I could speak with Pamela Hess, I would thank her profusely for a brilliant analysis which jibes perfectly what I've been hearing from military men and women since... onset Afghanistan.
Troops pant to go back, and because they know of the savagery, and know they must intervene. They are committed to life, and to protecting the lives of innocents.
Second WRT to onset in Iraq and the possibility of "insufficient amounts of troops". Not necessarily so.
These people had been so badly beaten down, had they not been provided the room to grow "freedom" on their own terms, they might necessarily have become emotionally dependent upon the US and coalition forces. There is a psychology to war.
And in order to assess the GENUINE condition of Iraq (that which lay beneath the surface of Hussein's totalitarian "Iraq"), it was important to see the full face and "diversity" of its people. It was not just innocents, but the evil ones too, who were accustomed to the strong arming control under Hussein.
In analogy, in years past, at onset in Afghanistan, and then again in Iraq, I referred to this as the psychology underlying the "battered woman". In most substantive (NON-PC) Shelters, one does need to gradually step back and permit the battered woman to grow her own will, and her own strength. Otherwise, she will not only go back to the same or another batterer, but she will always be dependent upon you, the provider, to protect her.
What is healthy, instead, is for her to relearn the world under her newer terms, gradually acclimate to those new terms, and make assessments with a helper, as to the newer psychology and real-life changes she needs to make.
I think the President, Cabinet, and the Military made the right decisions, pretty much, throughout. Certainly one can quibble a shoehorn logic about "weaponry" or tactics, or strategy in the pure domain of "war". And I can jump right on board and concur with those quibbles.
But on the whole, including all available factors, I think the US did right by Iraq and Afghanistan. Despite the Liberal Democrats.
And, I pray the US and coalition forces continue to do right by Iraq and Afghanistan.
Can you believe it
A journalist that was in Iraq going over with an objective point of view rather than a political agenda.
In short form, she's a professional. I might not always agree with her assessments, but she has proven to me, over time, she does strive to be as fair and objective as possible which amounts to light years above the calibre of most so-called "journalists" covering the WOT.
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.