May 09, 2007
A Little Competence Would Be Nice
It should probably come as no small wonder that the majority of the American people are against the War in Iraq; getting faulty misleading or inaccurate or even purposefully biased information does that.
Time and again and again, our soldiers and Marines tell us that the war they are fighting in Iraq is not the one being reported in the professional media.
Karin Brulliard's article in today's Washington Post is a prime example, starting with the headline, "Bombs Kill 20 in Sunni Insurgent Stronghold."
It may come as a bit of a shock to both Brulliard and her WaPo editors, but Ramadi has not been an insurgent "stronghold" by any practical definition for months.
Newly commissioned Iraqi police, tribal militias and Sunni and Shia Army units have been consistently rolling back al Qaeda and aligned insurgents in Ramadi since the founding of the Anbar Salvation Council last year.
The bulk of al Qaeda and its supporters have fled Ramadi, have no bases and control no large swathes of territory, and take to the streets openly at the great risk of being shot by either local citizens, Iraqi Police, Iraqi Army soldiers, American Army soldiers, or Marines. Just a tip to the Washington Post: if they don't control the ground, you can't call it a stronghold.
Even beyond the headline, Brulliard and the Post show an ignorance that is hard to ignore:
Iraqi army Lt. Col. Thamir Ahmed blamed the attacks on the Sunni insurgent group al-Qaeda in Iraq. He said the body of one of the bombers was found by authorities 300 yards from the car he detonated, still strapped in the driver's seat.
Perhaps in a Harry Turtledove alternative history novel al Qaeda could be considered a "Sunni insurgent group" in Iraq, but not in this world.
al Qaeda was, is, and remains an international terrorist group, and is composed mostly of foreign fighters, even in Iraq. The dead suicide bomber, like up to 90% of suicide bombers before him, was likely a foreign-born, non-Iraqi terrorist crossing into Iraq from Syria.
It makes it difficult for consumers of the Washington Post and other news organizations to make informed decisions about the war when the reporters themselves miss crucial distinctions, misreport facts, and mischaracterize the events and actors of the conflict. I could perhaps understand misstating the nature or character of one of the groups acting in this conflict early in the war, but as the conflict has been on-going since 2003, the media has very little excuse for these kinds of inaccuracies.
A little competence would be nice.
I have never once been polled regardless of type. Can we have a show of hands here? Have you been polled? How many times have you been polled? How long ago were you polled?
Posted by: Mekan at May 9, 2007 11:32 AMWe could capture and kill every Al Qaeda member in Iraq and the war would still be rage on. We would still be stuck there trying to suppress the civil war. On top of that, we'd still need to build the democracy, a feat which is unprecedented in such a situation.
A little competence would be nice.
The architects of this war have shown incompetence in spades. Cakewalk, Mission Accomplished, the WMD are NW of Tikrit, yellowcake, last throes, Downing Street, and Shinseki are just a few of myriad examples.
Posted by: Lex Steele at May 9, 2007 11:36 AMTrackbacked by The Thunder Run - Web Reconnaissance for 05/09/2007
A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention.
The architects of this war have shown incompetence in spades. Cakewalk, Mission Accomplished, the WMD are NW of Tikrit, yellowcake, last throes, Downing Street, and Shinseki are just a few of myriad examples.
Wow. With so much to choose from that actually was done wrong, you managed to botch most of what you listed.
The actual ground war against Saddam's military was a "cakewalk," one of the most lopsided military victories in world history. Some experts were expecting 20,000 American combat deaths in taking Baghdad alone. We'll have to be in Iraq another two decades to get close to that number.
The "Mission Accomplished" banner on the ship was for that ship's mission, which was complete. If you actually read Bush's speach delivered that day, he said just the opposite. Once again, we find a liberal talking point based upon an outright lie.
Not sure where you pulled that WMD reference, so I can't easily rebut it. Please provide context, or better yet, a link.
The yellowcake claims have been proven true; Saddam was searching various countries in Africa for it. Once again, another liberal lie.
"Last throws?" Yep, that's a fair cop.
Downing Street, however, was a rumor, based on a rumor, based on a rumor that turned out to contradict itself. It was, when you get right down to it, faulty liberal intelligence, and also untrue.
Shinseki was a general, nothing more, nothing less, and he is no moe capble than generals who came to other conclusions, and arguably less competent than some.
If you really want to hit where the war went wrong, hit the disbanding of the Iraqi Army, the ouster of the Baathists, the multiple and on-going failures of the State Dept., and a pathetic lack of planning regarding the occupation an rebuilding plans.
Their are much better failure points to discuss than can be found in the conspriacy theoryland called the Democratic Underground.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at May 9, 2007 12:06 PMI added an excerpt and link to my 2007.05.09 Dem Perfidy // Islamism Delenda Est Roundup
Posted by: Bill Faith at May 9, 2007 12:09 PMCmon CY, you know they dont care what really went wrong. They would just rather spew forth their KOS talking points drivel without actually looking at reality.
Posted by: Justin at May 9, 2007 01:44 PMI understand your point about 'cakewalk', but I find it disingenuous. It's equally true for me to say "It's a cakewalk to pull the pin out of this grenade," but in saying so I neglect the larger question of what to do with the grenade once the pin is pulled.
My interpretation of the Mission Accomplished event leaves no doubt that Bush was saying the mission in Iraq was complete. He expected to be greeted as a liberator, after all, so he had no idea what was forthcoming.
"We know where they [WMD] are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat."
--Donald Rumsfeld, ABC News interview
The yellowcake claims have been proven true; Saddam was searching various countries in Africa for it. Once again, another liberal lie.
Not true! The Niger documents upon which this was based were thoroughly debunked. Bush apologized for the infamous 16 words in his SOTU address, so apparently he disagrees with your conclusion.
There has been no debate about the authenticity of the Downing Street Memo, which stated in part, "Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy." That's as plain as the nose on your face.
Shinseki was a general, nothing more, nothing less, and he is no moe capble than generals who came to other conclusions, and arguably less competent than some.
He said we'd need what, 250,000 troops for Iraq (I don't recall the figure) and was fired for it. In fact he was correct, so ignoring and firing him is evidence of incompetence.
Posted by: Lex Steele at May 9, 2007 03:12 PMThere has been no debate about the authenticity of the Downing Street Memo
That's cuz its phony as a $3 bill.
Posted by: Purple Avenger at May 9, 2007 05:20 PMNot Dearlove, not M5, not Bush, nobody denied it's authenticity, PA.
Posted by: Lex Steele at May 9, 2007 10:50 PM
