[Kenyon]

Hersh has done the best reporting so far on this operation. He has had a history of being able to tap sources at the operational level, whether in the CIA or military.

His point of view is generally from the perspective of those on the ground actually doing the work - not from the high level cover your ass policy types. I suppose many are going to be critical of his reports because they think he is somehow undermining the war effort - he is not. He is performing a valuable service by getting out the straight story from those who are actually doing the job (special forces, CIA, etc.) and who need to have those (Franks et. al.) in policy making positions to get their acts together.

[longleaf]

What's interesting to me is that only a few days after this supposedly happened, we began to hear on the so-called "crackpot" Web sites such as Debka of a movement on our part to enlist a huge Russian expeditionary force to go into Afghanistan next spring. This makes a lot of sense when you realize that we have been bombing from high altitude for so long and expecting to win all wars that way that we have probably neglected "ground war" scenarios. I know it may be demoralizing to some, but I wouldn't necessarily discount everything Hersh reports.

[petbop]

I believe Hersh was the author of the false story that George Bush (41) flew to Paris and negotiated
with Iran to keep the hostages in custody during the 1980 campaign.

He may be right in these current stories, but I don't trust him.

[ChinaThreat]

Hersh does have good sources, I just finished reading his book "The Samson Option". Pretty high-level contacts, atleast back in the late 80s.

[ChinaThreat]

Let me restate though that Hersh seems to have a bit of a liberal tinge in his reporting, I think he may be a bit anti-semite...i can't support this anti-semite aspect of this statement, just the angle of this Samson Option Book i read i thought...

[mrsmith]

"not from the high level cover your ass policy types"

I thought it extremely obvious that this story sources ONLY "high level cover your ass policy types"!

[LS]

You might be right, but remember, this is the same guy who thought he had Marilyn Monroe's diary and wrote a whole book based on this fraudulent piece of "evidence," before yanking it out of the final draft.

The comments do not sound like Ranger/Special Ops guys to me, but I could be wrong.

[Professor Jim]

Hersh has sometimes been wrong in the past, but he has also gotten some amazing finds. Some of his more farfetched finds have turned out to be true. He is a fantastic reporter. Reporters today just want to be pundits; there is little investigative reporting going on. Hersh is a welcome exception. I agree with Kenyon.

[VOYAGER]

Obvioulsy these "facts" he is reporting are strictly his observations, so what is that worth?

To say unequivocally that his reporting is absolutely unbiased and can be believed without reservation is to deify this super being and we should all genuflect and walk backwards as we leave his "presence".

I am angry with the news media and their little news gatherers who do in fact influence their readers with crap that many times far exceeds the truth just for ratings.

I'm rapidly reaching the point where I don't believe any of these reporters if they tell just one obvious lie in the support of their careers.

All intentional liars are dispicably hateful!!

[blake6900]

Hersh has done the best reporting so far on this operation. He has had a history of being able to tap sources at the operational level, whether in the CIA or military.

Very well...clearly you're entitled to your opinion but I submit it would be helpful if you were to include some evidence to back up this statement. None of the quotes in Hersh's article are attributed to named sources. In fact when you read the entire report at Drudge you come across this little nugget:

One Delta Force soldier told a colleague that military planners "think we can perform fucking magic. We can't. Don't put us in an environment we weren't prepared for. Next time, we're going to lose a company."

Perhaps you could explain how it is that Seymour Hersch was privy to this "conversation" between "one Delta Force soldier" and "a collegue" since, as you say, Hersh has done the best reporting so far on this operation and he has had a history of being able to tap sources at the operational level, whether in the CIA or military.

Seymour Hersch has zero credibility. Anyone familiar with his work knows he makes it up as he goes along. He makes outlandish claims in his articles that he knows will produce plenty of bang for the buck and when the government (or any entity for that matter) chooses not to respond, he then can, and does, claim accuracy. It's this kind of BS journalism that has kept the National Enquirer in business all these years.

If you disagree, perhaps you could point to just one story he's reported in the past that wasn't eventually thoroughly discredited. Just one...

[Kierkegaard]

Yeah....I just wish he had gotten the scoop on how many farts the Afhgans ripped out in the desert while waiting for our spec ops forces to exit the compound. Real relevant and believable his assertions about pant pissing by our forces. It is very important at this time for us to hear every possible unconfirmable report about how chicken sh*t our forces are.