Reality Bites Rich Lowry
Reality Bites Rich Lowry
Remember National Review’s May 9th cover:
National Review editor Rich Lowry, who wrote the cover story above, pontificated from his desk in Washington: “It is time to say it unequivocally: We are winning in Iraq.”
Unfortunately for Iraqis and the U.S. troops on the ground, they cannot live in the same delusional world as Lowry. Today in the New York Times, American commanders provide a reality-based perspective on Iraq:
“American military commanders in Baghdad and Washington gave a sobering new assessment on Wednesday of the war in Iraq, adding to the mood of anxiety that prompted Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to come to Baghdad last weekend to consult with the new government….
“The generals said the buildup of Iraqi forces has been more disappointing than previously acknowledged…”
“The senior officer who met with reporters in Baghdad said there had been 21 car bombings in the capital in May, and 126 in the past 80 days. All last year, he said, there were only about 25 car bombings in Baghdad.”
- Max Bergmann
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
The only “winners” in this war have been the high-paid executives for the companies contracted to rebuid Iraq. Everyone else (yes, I mean EVERYONE else) has lost.
As a country, we’ve lost our credibility to the rest of the world. As Americans, we’ve lost the ability to hold our heads high with pride. As humans, we’ve lost tens of thousands of our bothers and sisters.
While a pundit can write an article about how we’re winning in Iraq, the rest of us can count the bodies that are being piled-up in the corner.
What in the hell are we winning anyway?
May 19th, 2005 at 2:23 pmWhere even to begin with this one?
To think that just back on 17 April, journalists at the Meet the Press were chatting about the the infamous $35,000 cab ride from Baghdad to the airport–what a private security service in Iraq currently charges certain well-heeled clients.
Roughly a 6 miles trip, so not quite $6000 per mile. This is what your $300 billion investment has bought.
If we’re winning, why don’t we even control the capital, Baghdad? It’s been over two years since Mission Accomplished.
Why don’t we control more than 10% of the major roads?
Why do our only real allies, the Brits, think we’re screwing up royally: Trigger-happy US troops ‘will keep us in Iraq for years’: “British defence chiefs have warned United States military commanders in Iraq to change their rules for opening fire or face becoming bogged down in a terrorist war for a decade or more.”
But why ask why, when dealing with wingnuts?
May 19th, 2005 at 2:32 pmParty Pooper! Don’t you know if we say “We’re Winning” or “turned a corner” or “the Insurgents are getting desparate” enough times it must be true!
May 19th, 2005 at 2:48 pmsince when do we hold the weekly standard to the high standards of reality?
May 19th, 2005 at 3:26 pmjeez guys – when he wrote that article, it was night in Baghdad, and we couldn’t really see that well. Plus there were no battles at that time. If we weren’t losing, then we were winning.
Now things are different. But it’s not his fault you don’t know exact situation the very instant that headline was determined, cuz it was true!
May 19th, 2005 at 3:41 pmA lot of things get said.
Before the war started, I predicted at least 150,000 American dead. So far, we’ve only lost a handful.
Whether we are winning or not cannot be determined by any living soul. It will be many years before that can be determined.
What is strange is the degree of joy in those “progressives” who root for the enemy. Someone explain that please. (in an adult manner)
May 19th, 2005 at 4:41 pmUh, Buckshot, I don’t think 1600 dead Americans is a “handful”. Not to mention the thousands wounded and maimed. “Progressives” as you call us are not “rooting for the enemy”… I guess for “conservatives” the act of speaking the truth means rooting for the enemy. Jeez, what a jerk. Oh, excuse me, I guess that was not stated in an adult manner.
May 19th, 2005 at 5:53 pmAs I wrote in “The Myth of the Bush Doctrine,” Lowry also offered this piece of psychosis on September 12, 2001:
“The American response should be closer to something along these lines: identifying the one or two nations most closely associated with our enemies, giving them 24-hours notice to evacuate their capitals (in keeping with our desire to wage war as morally as possible), then systematically destroying every significant piece of military, financial, and political infrastructure in those cities.”
May 19th, 2005 at 6:09 pmBuckshot must be one of those republicans who refused to go to Iraq and fight.
Of course he/she has no idea what is really going on there.
Republicans refused to go so how would they know anything about anything.
If you want the truth about Iraq, talk to those who have family and friends there. And I don’t mean Halliburtons employees, I mean real soldiers.
So Buckshot, who do you know that is over there fighting that can give a real account of the misery?..
No response necessary, we already know, your all talk and no action…typical republican.
How was that for maturity?
May 19th, 2005 at 7:19 pmOne more thought,
May 19th, 2005 at 7:50 pmYeah, this is a winning battle thats why the military recruiters cant get anyone to sign up…duh.
Jack,
In the scheme of things, 1600 dead is a drop in the bucket.
I don’t fit the “conservative mold”, really, in that I don’t vote GOP and I don’t believe in the bible.
Susan,
I’m not sure of your point. Your comments make it clear you haven’t absorbed much of what I’ve said, and I’m not interested in dealing with your erroneous assumptions.
May 19th, 2005 at 8:13 pmHey Buckshot says that HE predicted we would lose about 150,000 Americans invading Iraq, so actually we are doing great!
Whoopee, we still have over 140,000 soldiers left to kill, who else can we invade. How about Iran. Cuba is also kind of annoying, don’t ya think Buckshot?
Don’t worry, everythings fine. It will still be years and years before we can determine the outcome, so lets just keep shooting, hey Buck. Hooray, Hooray. We’re winning, we’re winning!
May 19th, 2005 at 10:21 pmThe generals said the buildup of Iraqi forces has been more disappointing than previously acknowledged…�
Condi & Rummy had previously acknowledged about 140,000 TRAINED Iraqis, Joe Biden questioned this number as he thought it was around 8,000 tops. Can’t wait to see him gloat over this one, or watch them just lie again when confronted with it.
May 20th, 2005 at 1:18 amBuckshot – you are a heartless mother f*cker. 1600 dead is a drop in the bucket? What about the tens of thousands of Iraqis that have died in this “war”? When you goddamn bastards stop thinking about the human cost of war, and can consider acceptable losses… I hope you rot in hell you sick c*ck sucker. Oh, and I hope your hell is a socialized system where the poor get their fair share of whatever you consider to be God’s bounty… Now, f*ck off!(/flame)
May 20th, 2005 at 9:27 amRuss,
What a meltdown. Hope you get control of yourself soon.
May 20th, 2005 at 11:55 amre #6
“Before the war started, I predicted at least 150,000 American dead. So far, we’ve only lost a handful.”
Thus we see, by his own admission, that he is subject to wildly inaccurate opinions, and as such all his postings should be taken with quite a few grains of salt.
“What is strange is the degree of joy in those “progressivesâ€? who root for the enemy.”
As to this tired-old right-wing chestnut, one can only hope that in the future he will summon up an orginal thought or two of his own, rather than regurgitating the talking-points of others.
May 20th, 2005 at 12:00 pmEmwk,
I said I predicted 150,000 deaths. That doesn’t mean I want 150,000 deaths.
I didn’t want to go to war. I didn’t support the action.
As far as your comment about my inaccurate prediction, you might note that the war continues, and likely will spread to Iran, and possibly to N Korea.
That’s why I didn’t support the action.
I don’t pretend to have all the facts, though. I mainly try to take care of myself and my family. The choices I make are based on what’s best for us.
The difference between you & me? I’m not angry. You don’t have to read my posts. Maybe you don’t have the self discipline to scroll past?
May 20th, 2005 at 1:18 pmre #17
“The difference between you & me? I’m not angry. You don’t have to read my posts. Maybe you don’t have the self discipline to scroll past?”
Evidently I struck a nerve there. It would appear that people of this sort would prefer that no one respond in an insightful manner to their public commentaries, which naturally begs the question “Why post then if one is reluctant to hear a dissenting voice?”. As always, it is critical to (1) Listen, (2) Consider, and then (3) Comment. One or even two of the three just won’t suffice unless, of course, one can only find security and comfort by viewing the world one- or two-dimensionally.
May 20th, 2005 at 3:00 pmEmwk,
Sruck a nerve? I’m not even sure what you are trying to say.
May 22nd, 2005 at 12:22 amGuys, no need to get upset over this, naturally this is just a journalistic blunder and he will pay for it by putting his reputation on the line like that. Don’t worry.
July 25th, 2006 at 3:36 amHarry Convict
Job well done.
April 21st, 2008 at 8:43 pm