Monday, May 14, 2007
We've won in Iraq.
Yes indeed, we've won.
How do I know, you ask. Well, today on the way home from work, I caught a report on the BBC about the Dura Market in Baghdad. A BBC reporter, just returned from 72 hours with a US Army platoon, was reporting in.
Now, given that lead in, I'd be expecting the normal baby-killer, civilian-assaulting profile for which the BBC is justly famous. Instead, the troops interviewed, a private, sergeant, and lieutenant, came across as professional and caring, despite massive pressure, and as totally committed to completing the mission. The sergeant, in particular, was really impressive, indicating that since we'd taken responsibility for peace in Iraq by invading, we'd be responsible for chaos in Iraq if we left prematurely.
None of the troops supported timetables for withdrawal, seeing them as nothing but planning tools for al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) (or "Mesopotamia", if you work fro the New York Times).
Questioned, the reporter allowed that the Dura Market had 200 vendors up and running and that the market was safe. Further, he commented that AQI was attempting to step up its tempo to match the American surge, in order to inflict enough American casualties so as to win the propaganda war in the US.
The bottom line to this report, however, was American commitment, and American success, and it's the first time I've heard anythign like this on the BBC in *months*. I think the BBC has figured out that AQI is going to lose, that Iraq will be stabilized, and that the US is not losing to this insurgency, and it (the BBC) doesn't want to be in a position of reporting disaster for the US right up to the point where miraculous victory occurs.
The BBC is covering its ass. We're winning.
Yes indeed, we've won.
How do I know, you ask. Well, today on the way home from work, I caught a report on the BBC about the Dura Market in Baghdad. A BBC reporter, just returned from 72 hours with a US Army platoon, was reporting in.
Now, given that lead in, I'd be expecting the normal baby-killer, civilian-assaulting profile for which the BBC is justly famous. Instead, the troops interviewed, a private, sergeant, and lieutenant, came across as professional and caring, despite massive pressure, and as totally committed to completing the mission. The sergeant, in particular, was really impressive, indicating that since we'd taken responsibility for peace in Iraq by invading, we'd be responsible for chaos in Iraq if we left prematurely.
None of the troops supported timetables for withdrawal, seeing them as nothing but planning tools for al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) (or "Mesopotamia", if you work fro the New York Times).
Questioned, the reporter allowed that the Dura Market had 200 vendors up and running and that the market was safe. Further, he commented that AQI was attempting to step up its tempo to match the American surge, in order to inflict enough American casualties so as to win the propaganda war in the US.
The bottom line to this report, however, was American commitment, and American success, and it's the first time I've heard anythign like this on the BBC in *months*. I think the BBC has figured out that AQI is going to lose, that Iraq will be stabilized, and that the US is not losing to this insurgency, and it (the BBC) doesn't want to be in a position of reporting disaster for the US right up to the point where miraculous victory occurs.
The BBC is covering its ass. We're winning.
Comments:
Post a Comment
