Author Topic: "A War We Just Might Win" (Read 2588 times)

Seagoon · « **on:** July 31, 2007, 12:00:18 PM »

For some time now, I've been hearing anecdotal evidence of positive returns from the "troop surge" in Iraq. Not surprisingly though, the mainline media hasn't been giving much lineage to these stories, largely I fear because they are heavily invested in the valid theory "defeat in Iraq = massive Republican defeat in '08". Obviously, no paper (with the possible exception of the Village Voice) has more interest in pressing home this strategy than the NY Times which has had an almost uniform "No Good News from Iraq is Fit To Print" policy since at least 2003.

That was until yesterday when they ran the following OP-ED entitled "A War We Just Might Win" from Michael O’Hanlon and Kenneth M. Pollack from the liberal Brookings Institution:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/30/opinion/30pollack.html

The OP-Ed has landed both of them and the Times in some extremely hot water for breaking ranks with the "Lose to Win" consensus on the left (frankly I think that this is short-sighted, they'll win in '08 even if O'Hanlon and Pollack are right if only due to a complete lack of vision amongst the Republicans and a total failure to listen to the concerns of their base)

Here are the initial paragraphs:

Quote

VIEWED from Iraq, where we just spent eight days meeting with American and Iraqi military and civilian personnel, the political debate in Washington is surreal. 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.

Sabre · « **Reply #1 on:** July 31, 2007, 01:00:17 PM »

I'd heard about this article, but hadn't read it until now. Thanks for the link. What is sad is my firm belief that the mainstream news sources will all but ignore this. Back in WWII, any good news (defined as showing progress towards victory) was hailed by the press, with set backs being de-emphasized. Now it is just the opposite. Or perhaps what has changed is the left's (and their willing accomplices) definition of good news (redefined as anything that casts dispersions on the Administration and leads to disgrace and defeat in Iraq/Afganistan).

Not so long ago, when the Iraqi elections were held and a consititution voted on and adopted, prominet democrat Harry Reid was saying that political progress was useless unless the security situation improved. This, he said was impossible because the President didn't send enough troops into Iraq to insure security. Then the President announces a troop increase to achieve that security, which Reid instantly opposes. Now that the surge (along with evolving tactics) are resulting in an improving security situation, Harry Reid over the weekend said that improving security was useless unless the political situation improves.

Like the democrats' position on the economy, any improvement will instantly be countered with some reason why that improvement is irrelevant. "Growth is through the roof" is countered with, "The gap between rich and poor is growing"; "Unemployment is at an all-time low" is replied to with "But their not good jobs"; "Wages and earings are up" envokes "but we're producing too much CO2!" And of course, "US and Iraqi casualties are down" is countered with "but we're producing too much CO2!!!" (Hey, the left doesn't have to make sense, just noise:huh )

DiabloTX · « **Reply #2 on:** July 31, 2007, 01:25:58 PM »

I actually saw this piece on World News Tonight yesterday and was surprised it had been picked up by one of the major television news shows. I actually stood there staring at the tv speechless.

Video story in upper right.

Elfie · « **Reply #3 on:** July 31, 2007, 01:33:55 PM »

At least the good news is finally getting some press coverage. Maybe this will become a trend.

Mickey1992 · « **Reply #4 on:** July 31, 2007, 01:37:57 PM »

Read Michael Yon's blogs. He constantly talks about there being only a handful of reporters embedded with active troops. I am convinced that most of the reason we do not hear anything but canned wire reports is because there is simply no one there reporting it. The lame stream media just reports on casualty numbers.

http://www.michaelyon-online.com/wp/bread-and-a-circus-part-i-of-ii.htm

john9001 · « **Reply #5 on:** July 31, 2007, 01:47:45 PM »

"lame stream media "

GtoRA2 · « **Reply #6 on:** July 31, 2007, 03:43:19 PM »

Who was the recent democrat politician who is being quoted all over now basically saying "success in Iraq is bad news for us” (the democrats)?

AKIron · « **Reply #7 on:** July 31, 2007, 03:52:41 PM »

Before you know it the democrats will be wanting to reverse the reversal on their '02 Iraq vote.

tedrbr · « **Reply #8 on:** July 31, 2007, 03:53:04 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Elfie
At least the good news is finally getting some press coverage. Maybe this will become a trend.

Probably just a means to upset all the candidate held positions on the issue. In general, the media is about bashing the current Administration, since polls tell them that will be popular. But the polls also tell them that bashing Congress and candidates will be popular too, so set them up with anti-war, pull-out-now rhetoric..... then pull the platform out from under them.

"News media" is much more about political positions, entertainment, and market share. The "news" part gets lost in all that.

AKIron · « **Reply #9 on:** July 31, 2007, 03:57:37 PM »

I'm not sure even John Kerry can keep up with the possible before/after/befores on this one. 5 will get you 10 that should Iraq become a stable democracy in a few years there won't be a democrat anywhere that called for us to pull out early.

FrodeMk3 · « **Reply #10 on:** July 31, 2007, 04:14:16 PM »

Quote

I'm not sure even John Kerry can keep up with the possible before/after/befores on this one. 5 will get you 10 that should Iraq become a stable democracy in a few years there won't be a democrat anywhere that called for us to pull out early.

Unfortunately, AK, that question's still on the table(stable democracy.)

If the government that the U.S. installed can stand on it's own, for a year, two years, even more, It might sway an election or two. If it falls almost immediately after the U.S. pullout, There'll be a huge round of "I told you so's". Also, if it does fall, and is replaced by a Muslim-Theologically based gov.t', that will affect our election's as well. Right now, this would be like trying to place a $100 to win bet on the Kentucky derby, without even seeing the odds of any horse.

FrodeMk3 · « **Reply #11 on:** July 31, 2007, 04:17:07 PM »

Here's something that might affect the outcome, too:http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070731/pl_nm/usa_iraq1_dc_1

44 min. old, according to yahoo! news.

john9001 · « **Reply #12 on:** July 31, 2007, 05:55:51 PM »

the govt of iraq was elected by iraqis.

AKIron · « **Reply #13 on:** July 31, 2007, 06:28:45 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by FrodeMk3
Here's something that might affect the outcome, too:http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070731/pl_nm/usa_iraq1_dc_1

44 min. old, according to yahoo! news.

The US is still in Germany and Japan. Would you consider them to be stable?

vorticon · « **Reply #14 on:** July 31, 2007, 06:45:21 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by FrodeMk3
Unfortunately, AK, that question's still on the table(stable democracy.)

If the government that the U.S. installed can stand on it's own, for a year, two years, even more, It might sway an election or two. If it falls almost immediately after the U.S. pullout, There'll be a huge round of "I told you so's". Also, if it does fall, and is replaced by a Muslim-Theologically based gov.t', that will affect our election's as well. Right now, this would be like trying to place a $100 to win bet on the Kentucky derby, without even seeing the odds of any horse.

i find it interesting that the democrats wish for you to bail out of iraq, meaning let a muslim theology government have control, but get there panties in a bunch over american politicians going to church on sunday.