And for those who say the violence has decreased, do you remember back in September they changed the reporting rules? Killed by a car bomb….doesn’t count. Shot in the front of the head….victim of crime not war violence.

The situation isn’t changing, just the definitions.

If he is to be believed at all, the mainstream press is only telling part of the story. Life in-country is far better than it has been since about 1957, and much more stable than what Americans are hearing here.

You obviously don’t believe the official line, but according to him, the media line is even less accurate. That is, unless you don’t believe a native Iraqi.

Comment by richg — October 16, 2007 @ 4:27 pm

Your OTAK Engineer friend is in the minority if we are to believe the native iraqis!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/19_03_07_iraqpollnew.pdf

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/10_09_07_iraqpoll.pdf

Comment by republicans hate facts — October 17, 2007 @ 1:49 am

I can tell by the way you write that you weren’t around then. I was.

Also, do you wonder if perphaps our bribing, from 75 million dollars to one of saddam’s former goons who promptly got dispatched by one of his own henchman, (who AQI outbid us on,) to a cool 1500 $ for a sunni to marry a shia, is playing any part in pacifying some areas? If so, are you concerned at all, what will happen when american taxpayers stop paying iraqis to play nice? Can you point to ANY political progress, and can you point to ANYONE in charge of anything in iraq who ever claimed that the “surge” was anything but an attempt to buy time for the political reconciliation which as yet to show any single spark of progress?

Also, how do you propose we stop iran and shia islam from gaining power in IRaq? Before you say Iranian idealogy or SHia theocracy is “extremism”, I urge you to look at that region and then try to insist with a straight face that these idealogies are anything but the popular norm. How well have secular parties fared in recent Iraqi elections?

Also, can you please show us some information about how exactly one becomes a member of AQI, and how we can use that information to distinguish people its ok for us to bribe into not attacking us from people who its NOT ok for us to bribe not to attack us?

Because from what I gather, your logic is its ok to pay some terrorists not to attack us, but its not ok to even negotiate with some other terrorists. I’m just trying to figure out how, in your mind, we determine who those people are.. and please dont give me some self-conclusory statement like “if they are in Al-queda”… we need to figure out how to ascertain and determine who is in the AQ and who isnt… unless you think they keep a memebership roster somewhere…

Too little to late. This is “BUSH’S WAR.” That would be George W. Bush’s war. No way that you can distance yourself from this monster now. No way. It’s yours. Own it.

You are more slimy than usual today.

First you try to put words in DRxJ’s mouth, even repeating your misrepresentation (”if you do not in fact…”), and then you try to call Lara Logan’s work into question.

Fact is, Exley, Ms. Logan does report from Iraq. You can watch her wearing a bullet proof vest as she walks on a street somewhere in Iraq (which is far more than you will ever do) here. You can also catch more footage of her reporting from Iraq here, and here.

Don’t let the facts get in the way of your delusions.

Comment by ArtZ — October 16, 2007 @ 10:30 pm

Boy, that would be good. I think we can agree on that.

Comment by richg

Not according to Lara Logan. It seems we are actually losing in the field. However, it is even difficult to find out ANY new about what is going on over there on a daily basis. Why not simply tell the story, good or bad?
And I don’t mean you have to be “fair and balanced” and try to manufacture “good” stories to offset the “bad”, or vice versa. I mean just report the news.

Comment by richg — October 16, 2007 @ 7:38 pm

Not with regular bombings of pipelines.

Comment by ArtZ — October 16, 2007 @ 7:00 pm

Could it be that they are OPPOSED to this administration? I remember that they (the news media) were mildly opposed to Viet Nam under Lyndon Johnson, turning to very opposed under Nixon. We were winning in the field then, but losing in the news at home. This part looks the same now.

Comment by STPdem — October 16, 2007 @ 4:55 pm

Then why has that not been done? We could have easily and simply marched in and turned the wells over to Halliburton.

During the Vietnam conflict, it was the powerful images of war coming through the television sets that helped turn the American public opinion against the war.
What is wrong with telling, or showing the truth?

I think you just answered your own question.

Comment by TripMaster Monkey

…but what is stopping the networks or cable news stations from showing the truth? Are they that much of a puppet of the administration?

Comment by Owl — October 16, 2007 @ 4:31 pm

I don’t dispute anything you say here. I was only explaining why Tal Afar was viewed as a model counterinsurgency campaign. As for it not being our right to “fight the war as a whole,” we are in total agreement. It is an illegal war, but once we were there, we owed it to the Iraqis to apply successful tactics everywhere, not just Tal Afar. But this war was not about the Iraqi people from the beginning, it was about privatizing oil and and perpetuating a $620 billion defense budget.

That presumes it is America’s right to “fight the war as a whole”. Sure, “we” can find this or that tactic to come up with some kind of self-defined “success” from “our” point of view. It’s beside the point for the Iraqis, who have a million dead and four million displaced, isn’t it? It’s an unmitigated disaster for them. Hell, Logan describes for Leno how the US has come up with the tactic in Anbar of embracing and arming the former “enemy”. Sure, our “success” has followed, and sure, casualty rates have temporarily been reduced. But at what cost? Which Iraqis will pay? How will US troops pay in the long run? It’s long since time for the US to militarily be trying to reshape Iraq after its abject political failure.

If he is to be believed at all, the mainstream press is only telling part of the story. Life in-country is far better than it has been since about 1957, and much more stable than what Americans are hearing here.

You obviously don’t believe the official line, but according to him, the media line is even less accurate. That is, unless you don’t believe a native Iraqi.

Please read my relevant post in the ThinkFast thread before you concede to Keltoi…he’s not giving you the whole story.
Comment by TripMaster Monkey — October 16, 2007 @ 3:39 pm

Buckie,

Please read the story at the top of the thread where TP has crossed out “mugged” and replaced it with “not mugged”.

Also,

>>So the first reports were wrong…that still doesn’t make the ReighWing Scum…like you.

Buck Fush

Comment by Buckie Boy — October 16, 2007 @ 3:37 pm

I think you are trying to do something really intelligent like make an ad hominem personal attack on me, but you seem to have muffed it…

Comment by Exley — October 16, 2007 @ 2:42 pm

Who says that propaganda doesn’t work? Witness the results when a weak mind is subjected to it. AQI makes up 5-7 percent of the total number of insurgents yet, with a good dosis of propaganda, some people are convinced that their presence is much larger than it actually is and that defeating them will solve all the problems in Iraq. Of course, it only works on weak or defective minds!