Posted on 07/30/2007 1:24:37 PM PDT by r-q-tek86
On Sunday, NewsBusters reported a shocking discussion that ensued on "The Chris Matthews Show" wherein five liberal media members actually debated why America shouldn't withdraw its troops from Iraq.
Maybe more shocking, the following day, an op-ed was published in the New York Times claiming that "We are finally getting somewhere in Iraq, "morale is high," and, as a result, this is "a war we just might win."
Adding to the shock is that this piece was written by two members of the Brookings Institution, which even Wikipedia acknowledges is "widely regarded as being politically liberal." The authors - Michael O'Hanlon and Kenneth M. Pollack - described themselves as "two analysts who have harshly criticized the Bush administration's miserable handling of Iraq."
Not anymore. Better prepare yourself for an alternate reality (emphasis added throughout):
The Bush administration has over four years lost essentially all credibility. Yet now the administration's critics, in part as a result, seem unaware of the significant changes taking place.
Here is the most important thing Americans need to understand: We are finally getting somewhere in Iraq, at least in military terms. As two analysts who have harshly criticized the Bush administration's miserable handling of Iraq, we were surprised by the gains we saw and the potential to produce not necessarily "victory" but a sustainable stability that both we and the Iraqis could live with.
Shocking. But it got even better:
After the furnace-like heat, the first thing you notice when you land in Baghdad is the morale of our troops...Today, morale is high. The soldiers and marines told us they feel that they now have a superb commander in Gen. David Petraeus; they are confident in his strategy, they see real results, and they feel now they have the numbers needed to make a real difference.
And, the numbers speak for themselves:
[C]ivilian fatality rates are down roughly a third since the surge began - though they remain very high, underscoring how much more still needs to be done.
[...]
[T]hings look much better than before. American advisers told us that many of the corrupt and sectarian Iraqi commanders who once infested the force have been removed. The American high command assesses that more than three-quarters of the Iraqi Army battalion commanders in Baghdad are now reliable partners (at least for as long as American forces remain in Iraq).
Amazing, wouldn't you agree. Yet, the best was still to come:
In war, sometimes it's important to pick the right adversary, and in Iraq we seem to have done so. A major factor in the sudden change in American fortunes has been the outpouring of popular animus against Al Qaeda and other Salafist groups, as well as (to a lesser extent) against Moktada al-Sadr's Mahdi Army.
These groups have tried to impose Shariah law, brutalized average Iraqis to keep them in line, killed important local leaders and seized young women to marry off to their loyalists. The result has been that in the last six months Iraqis have begun to turn on the extremists and turn to the Americans for security and help. The most important and best-known example of this is in Anbar Province, which in less than six months has gone from the worst part of Iraq to the best (outside the Kurdish areas). Today the Sunni sheiks there are close to crippling Al Qaeda and its Salafist allies. Just a few months ago, American marines were fighting for every yard of Ramadi; last week we strolled down its streets without body armor.
Maybe most shocking, the authors, almost speaking directly to dovish Democrats in Congress as well as those running for president, concluded:
How much longer should American troops keep fighting and dying to build a new Iraq while Iraqi leaders fail to do their part? And how much longer can we wear down our forces in this mission? These haunting questions underscore the reality that the surge cannot go on forever. But there is enough good happening on the battlefields of Iraq today that Congress should plan on sustaining the effort at least into 2008.
How extraordinary to read this in the New York Times.
While I appreciate your positive outlook, and I am a patient man, there is no reason in hell that 4 years into this thing we are just getting around to ‘securing Baghdad’. That should have been done just about immediately... within 6 months of going in. I hope Iraq is our ally in the future but frankly we were much too polite going into this thing.
Marching orders from the DNC and Clinton campaign following their recent debates. Manipulation pure and simple.
“Get off the administration’s back. We have a great economy and we feel generally safe. Can the man get no credit at all?”
I give GWB credit for reducing taxes and going into both Iraq and Ashcanistan. But I fault him for not using sufficient force, which has delayed the success we see today. So to that extent I will *not* get off their backs.
Don't worry. The stories are already written, just in case. /s
The motive is to back Hillary since she is the only “hawk” among the Ds.
If we had a larger ‘footprint’ during the occupation then every Iraqi would would have sided against us.
Why are you bringing this donk talking point up anyway? The surge is working.
(hillary’s back room talk with New York Times}
“I want to thank all of you for demonizing the Bush Administration in the past but I’m going to start campaigning in a new direction and that is talking more positive about the war on terror. We have to appear on the right side of this issue before the election, so I want you to take the lead and start reporting positive results.
I have talked with ranking members of my party and they agree they will also start talking positive about Iraq and if we keep talking long enough and frequently enough it will appear to the general public, we have always been the party on the right side of this issue.
We have a good full year to spread this propaganda and as, you know, it works. Before the year is out, we will have everyone believing we always were the backers of this war, just as we did with wefare reform, we’ll take the credit.
Thank you all and you are dismissed.
Just as if they were with us all along!
Liberals looked long and hard and realized they didn’t want to give birth to a loss - one that would mark them for decades. They’re nothing if not manipulative.
It will be interesting to see, if success continues, if the Dems can spin victory to their favor. They are so far out on a limb being against this war I don’t see it happening. Hillary might come out good, but no one else will. But then again that may be the point.
I wonder what their ulterior motive is................
Has to be one, since the very thought of even a smattering of intellectual honesty creeping into this rag would send Hillary & friends into (much needed) therapy.
Does the NYT not understand all the talk and demands of a pullout, if successful, would cause a massacre that could not be “Bush’s fault”?
You know... it’s the funniest thing; I looked EVERYWHERE at the DU site and found absolutely NO mention of this story..... I’m shocked!
“We should maintain a strong presence in Iraq.”
We will.
Probably was the recent polling that showed support for the initial invasion had actually risen substantially amongst Americans. That was a shocker for the 'cut and run' MSM crowd. The plain fact of the matter is, no one wants to make the situation in the 'Oil Rich' Middle East any worse then it currently is. Pulling out all our troops is guaranteed to do just that. It is the one strategy that WILL fail.
.
Don’t tell Reid and Pelosi good news in Iraq ping.
Hillary Clinton is very mean, very rude, very phony, very annoying to hear and watch and very uncharismatic. No person with these destructive character qualities will be elected President of the United States, and neither Hillary Clinton nor the media can do anything about it.
Since it's the New York Slimes we're dealing with here, the first question we should ask is which side is "we" to them.
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.