home

On The Ground

While O'Hanlon and Pollack ignore their consistently erroneous track record on assessing the Iraq War, their big claim is that they were "on the ground." But, Michael Ware has been on the ground in Iraq the whole time and he vehemently disagrees with their conclusions. And he has a better track record on the Iraq War:

h/t Think Progress.

< Retribution | Gonzales Responds; Leahy Not Impressed >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Really Interesting - Thanks for that link (none / 0) (#1)
    by jerry on Wed Aug 01, 2007 at 02:22:49 PM EST
    I don't know as much world history as I should, but this report makes me think of other divided cities: Beirut, Jerusalem, and segregated countries.... "Green Lines" and Ghettos haven't really worked out too well in terms of long lasting peace.

    Interesting... (none / 0) (#2)
    by Strick on Wed Aug 01, 2007 at 02:59:11 PM EST
    Michael Yon and Michael Totten (are all these embedded reporters named "Michael"?) who are embedded in Diyala Province and the Red Zone of Baghdad respectively, offer a much more positive view of things:

    7 Rules: 1 Oath

    In The Wake of The Surge

    I don't think anyone's hiding the fact that our new found Sunni allies are former insurgents (Yon's reports emphasis the fact) who want us to go home soon, but not too soon, or that they're struggling with how to put things back together.  If anything, the reports mostly suggest that they're tired of the fighting.  That's the best sign of all.

    Regardless, like the man said, there's no military solution to the troubles in Iraq.  Or more accurately, there's no solely military solution.  It's just that an end to fighting is a necessary precursor.

    No human conflict in history has reached a political solution while the fighting continued.  You have to separate the fighters and give them a bit of time to cool down before any real progess can be made on that front.

    It looks like the surge has some hope of doing that.

    Do you need me to find (none / 0) (#3)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Aug 01, 2007 at 03:29:32 PM EST
    similar reporting in 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006?

    This is simply a silly way of considering the situation.

    Unless we surge to 500,000, how can this possibly work? And I mean 500,000 permanently.


    Parent

    Sure, where we surge (none / 0) (#4)
    by Geekesque on Wed Aug 01, 2007 at 03:38:52 PM EST
    there is a temporary drop-off in anarchy and mass death.

    Unfortunately, we can only surge in about 1/3 of the country.  Guess what happens everywhere else.

    Parent

    I believe that Michael Yon (none / 0) (#9)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Aug 02, 2007 at 08:34:13 PM EST
    left the war zone in 2005 didn't he?  He is past special forces and also killed a man in a bar fight.  He is a little too military headed for me to consider an unbiased journalist.  As for Micheal Totten here's his website and it hardly sounds like paradise in a snowglobe.

    Parent
    does this sound like it's working? (none / 0) (#5)
    by Sailor on Wed Aug 01, 2007 at 03:58:25 PM EST
    Shades of Judy Miller (none / 0) (#6)
    by Dulcinea on Wed Aug 01, 2007 at 04:05:15 PM EST
    Dicko referred to O'Hanlon and Pollack's article in the Times as proof of the surge's success.  Well, it worked before so he tried it again.  He has never been wrong, says he.  We wish.

    Here's more proof.... (none / 0) (#7)
    by desertswine on Thu Aug 02, 2007 at 04:05:44 PM EST
    That'll Teach Them (none / 0) (#8)
    by squeaky on Thu Aug 02, 2007 at 04:21:27 PM EST
    To dilly dally with the passage of the petroleum law.

    Parent