A matter-of-fact report on Iraq
A report on Iraq from CBS and the AP credits the surge ordered by President Bush, the Anbar Awakening, and the Iraqi government with great success in reducing violence and increasing stability in that country. Amazing. Excerpt:
Iraq’s national security adviser said Tuesday his country will not accept any security deal with the United States unless it contains specific dates for the withdrawal of U.S.-led forces. The comments by Mouwaffak al-Rubaie were the strongest yet by an Iraqi official about the deal now under negotiation with U.S. officials. It came a day after Iraq’s prime minister first said publicly that he expects the pending troop deal with the United States to have some type of timetable for withdrawal…
Iraq’s government has felt increasingly confident in recent weeks about its authority and the country’s improved stability, and Iraqi officials have sharpened their public stance in the negotiations considerably in just the last few days. Violence in Iraq has fallen to its lowest level in four years. The change has been driven by the 2007 buildup of American forces, the Sunni tribal revolt against al Qaeda in Iraq and crackdowns against Shiite militias and Sunni extremists.
The byline of the report on one website credits AP’s chief of Middle East news for the report. We have to admit to surprise to read these sentences from AP: “Violence in Iraq has fallen to its lowest level in four years. The change has been driven by the 2007 buildup of American forces, the Sunni tribal revolt against al Qaeda in Iraq and crackdowns against Shiite militias and Sunni extremists.” What accounts for the changed tone of the reporting?
July 8th, 2008 at 6:22 pm
The reasons for the change are: 1) The success is now impossible to ignore, 2) It is preparation for the new narrative which will be: The war was a mistake because the Iraqis want us out now and the Obama withdrawal stance is now correct. Even if withdrawal starts under Bush, the attempt will be to give Obama the credit for his “vision”. It will only work with those blinded by Bush derangement syndrome. Giving Bush credit will be impossible for the media regardless of the facts. Fortunately there are more sources for information today. unfortunately we don’t all use them.
July 8th, 2008 at 9:27 pm
The goal was always to advocate a rapid and immediate pull-out of American forces.
The old narrative was, “This war can never be won, so continued presence of American forces there is useless. They should be pulled out immediately.”
Now the narrative is, “The surge was a spectacular success, and American forces are no longer needed. They should be pulled out immediately.”
July 9th, 2008 at 2:44 pm
I get the impression that the majority of the country is tired of the negative view of the war and is ready for the other side of the story. The media will now be torn between giving us that and hurting Obama. I think we will see the most amazing reversal yet from Obama. Will it cost him on his judgment meme? The media will get away with it’s reversal and even profit from it. “Heh, we just report the news.” We don’t need no stinking judgment.
July 9th, 2008 at 2:56 pm
The change in tone is a result of the clarity of the trend of events within Iraq. From day one, I think the intent of the Iraq invasion was to foster an environment where democracy can flourish in an environment that was previously completely corrupt and totalitarian. If democracy can flourish in Iraq, it should be able to flourish anywhere.
I believe the virtual “border fence” has been built within the Middle East that shows the future is democracy. The Iraqis are now taking charge of their own country in a democratic manner and are dealing with the US in an internationally accepted way. The successful negotiations for troop removal will be the frosting on the cake.
This is all thanks to George, (poster boy of all that is good and decent).