Michael Yon strikes a familiar theme;
As the British increase their forces in Afghanistan, they are drawing down in Iraq. Although the drawdown in Iraq is based on pragmatism, the enemy apparently is attempting to create the perception of a military rout. So while the British reduce their forces in southern Iraq, they are coming under heavier fire and the enemy makes claims of driving “the occupiers” out.In reality, the Brits were about to transfer authority over the Maysan Province to the Iraqi government. Thus, the day’s purpose, although seemingly more ceremonial in nature, was to counterpunch in the perception war, by focusing on the progress being made by the Iraqi Security Forces in the region. Some of the biggest battles in Iraq today are being fought not with bombs and bullets, but with cameras and keyboards. For whatever reasons—and there are many—today, when Western media is most needed here, it’s nearly gone.
[...]
And that was it: no big drama. The journalists all disappeared. The important political people went back to Baghdad or wherever, and few people seemed to notice that another Iraqi province was turned over. A sampling of the resulting coverage of the ceremony might explain why the handover of authority to Iraqis in a fourth province did not resound as loudly as one would think, given the phalanx of reporters and camera crews.
The transfer of authority did not even make the cut for news for most US publications and networks. Of those which included the story in their news reports, most mentioned it only as part of an overall report about the day’s activities in Iraq. Many of those included it in reports which were headlined or sandwiched with bad news about the violence in other parts of Iraq.
The Washington Post’s “Bombers Defy Security Push, Killing at least 158 in Baghdad” briefly mentions the transfer in a sentence in the seventeenth paragraph. Likewise, The New York Times’ “Bombings Kill at Least 171 Iraqis in Baghdad” mentions the transfer of the province somewhere in the sixth paragraph.
This general theme carried over in the UK media coverage as well.
Lots of photos.
Via email;
"Am not saying that all of Anbar is peaceful, just that I am seeing zero action where I am. Nothing at all for days. This might not seem like much, but it's a very significant departure from the noise and smoke one can grow accustomed to here in Anbar Province.Published a new dispatch from Maysan Province. After this, I'll publish four more about our British friends, and then a substantial piece about the Marines I am with now."
If you're inclined to write the editors of those newspapers whose commentary on Iraq offers little more than recycled UN reports by Bush-bashing Ottawa imbeds, you might include a link to Michael Yon's dispatch to remind them what journalism looks like.
Or print it off and include it with your cancelled subscription.
And again, more 'tell-it-like-it-is' truth at sda than in our beloved media.
But then, why would the MSM report on a humanity success story. Girls in school, women being free to have a life, the DICKtator gone....
Oh well, ya know the saying ----- "if it doesn't bleed, it doesn't lead."
Bad News Birds.
well fur sure that will lead the CBC news tonight . . . the girly man always presents a balanced view of the world to the Canadian masses.
Jeffrey Simpson is a mindless blob of protoplasm.
In case you hadn't already noticed.
Well yes, it will be interesting to see whether this gets mentioned on the news tonight. Good news gets buried, as you say, what with Lebanon and all...
I don't have any subscriptions left to cancel; and inform any salespeople who call that, on principle, I won't take their paper - even a free copy.
Sure, I write to the MSM leftists, but, the unique characteristic of someone 'stuck on stupid', ie, stuck within their beliefs, is that they are immune to reason, facts, evidence, logic. Immune to any action that can impede their constant re-telling of Their Story.
So, people like Simpson, Margolis, Siddiqui - are stuck in one narrative - a fixed, relentless hatred of the US and Bush.
People like Weston, Travers, Taber, Galloway etc -have an additional narrative - a fixed dislike of Harper and the Conservatives.
There is no way to debate any of this with them; they have, like some cheap hack novelist, only the one narrative, only the one plotline - and no facts, no evidence, nothing - can deter them from this plotline.
After all, they get paid for it, just like the hack dime-store novelist.
The only recourse, I think, apart from cancelling subscriptions, is blogs. More and more comments, more and more blogs.
I am in the same position as ET.
I have never subscribed as I have considered the G&M nothing but Liberal lickspittle and Mr. Simpson in my view personifies the term.
The Bush and Harper hatred emanating from the G&M is palpable.
((palpable (esp. of a feeling or atmosphere) so intense as to be almost touched or felt :))
Note that this handover was from a few weeks ago. So, no - you didn't hear about it on the nightly news or any other.
Note, however, how the media is dovetailing planned turnovers and redeployment with the retirement of Tony Blair and a supposed abandonment of Iraq by the Brits.
Does anyone know where can we find out the dates at which the various provinces were handed back to the Iraqi government by coalition forces? It would be nice to see this on a map.
Which means that we don't EVER hear about it; that we always sorta know the handovers are taking place, but they aren't news...
The American and Canadian press wrote the Iraq war's final headline year ago like the obituaries of the famous they write in advance -"US Defeated In Iraq". They shut down shop there a long time ago. If you don't have a credible presence in Iraq, I guess you can't be accused of fudging facts. You just don't know, which is helpful when you have a political agenda and the Orwellian means to pull it off.
Even if tomorrow Iraq divided itself into three separate places, they are still people that went through a profound change with self-determination still in their hands unlike life under Saddam. They would still have a good chance of getting it right. The Kurds sure would.
Could the MSM ever entertain that as a reasonable, rather than catastrophic, outcome? Never. They want the Iraqis and Bush to fail. They are invested in it.
Imagine the world in which the MSM would have us live.
Remember when GWB claimed "victory" aboard USS Lincoln. It seems the press are doing their same, with their premature claims of "defeat."
I didn't agree with invading Iraq in first place. At least they are making some progress for this mess of a nation state. Unfortunately, we have given rallying point to every anti-semite, marxist, islamist and moonbat out there. Al Queda is now well entrenched in Iraq.
I doubt world press or politics (pres election 08) will allow the job, ill advised as it was, to be finished.
It’s not patriotic to leave our soldiers in Iraq to fight and die for a Shiite theocracy. Whether this president or the next withdraws from Iraq there will be dancing in the streets of Baghdad. Shiites and Sunnis alike will celebrate their “victory” over the occupiers. That’s the only “victory” that’s going to be won there. As soon as the aid money buyoffs run out the stooges who run the country, whether it’s Maliki or another set of Iranian backed goons will start making public anti-American utterances in order to hang onto their phony baloney jobs or just to keep themselves from being strung up from lamp posts. They’ll tear up any godawful hydrocarbon law forced down their throats by Cheney in a New York minute.
Why would they be so ungrateful? First of all because they’re Arabs and live in the ME. The US has been getting bad press in those parts for decades. Secondly because Bush 1 told them to overthrow Saddam in 1991 and then had coalition soldiers stand idly by, sometimes as Republican Guard troops moved right through their ranks to massacre them. Then we sanctioned the whole country into the poorhouse for over a decade for Saddam’s sins. Now we’ve invaded, occupied and destroyed their country. We've arrested them without charges and locked them up without trial and tortured them. 4 million are displaced. 2 million outside the country. Probably a million have died. 53% in the last poll said they have a close friend or family member who has been killed or wounded by the violence. 69% say coalition troops make the security situation worse, not better. 71% say killing American soldiers is justifiable. 60% are unemployed with no way to feed their families. A majority say there may be a short term spike in violence once we leave but they still want us out.
Bush knows all that and it’s the reason he won’t withdraw. If he can just hang on til January ‘09 someone else, be it a Repub or Dem, (and there’s no way it’s going to be a Repub if we’re still in Iraq) will be left holding the bag, taking the blame for his latest failure as has been the case his whole life.
You and Yon can wax rhapsodic about the Brits turning another province over to a bunch of Arab mafia bosses but you're deluding yourselves. It changes none of the above facts.
Markg8:
Not only is Bush not withdrawing, he is doubling the forces. This is not the action of the defeated man without vision you suggest he is.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2007/05/22/MNG7QPV65N1.DTL
"Or print it off and include it with your cancelled subscription."
Also be sure to drop a few dollars in Yon's tip jar. This level of performance deserves a reward.
There was once a goupe of 13 provinces that finally agreed to Unite , the Document was Drafted and it took 11 years for all Party Signers to accept the terms .
This happened in 1776 and by 1787 the Creation of the United States Of America was born , it went through many changes and a Civil war along with ending Slavery and protecting the Nation by allowing the People to bare Arams to defend against Foreign invaders or homeland malitias/Terrorists that are a threat to Security and Democracy.
Jack Layton subscribes to the concept that Freedom is free and we only need to Flip the switch to the Democracy/Human Rights position and we can leave Afghanistan as if it's a Star Trek episode after Kirk and Spock solve all the problem and go on to the next Planet.
If Taliban-Jack wants to negotiate with the Taliban, then lets see how he reacts to sending Bill Siksay and Libby Davies as the Gay-Friendly team to re-educate the Shariah Law Taliban that have no quams with sliting the throats of Gays and feamles that offend Allah or Muhammed.
When Jack crusaded for the ban on Trans-fats
that are causing Obesity he was sure to avoid using Libby Davies as the Poster Person for
banning junk food Oils that harm our kids , so is it any surprise Jack is hiding his Homosexual MP's from dealing with the Taliban issue .
The NDP love to pick what hills are worth dying for and what ones can allow human rights violations to continue , the NDP keeps claiming to speak for Canada and yet can't get these voters to put them in Office, the 15% ceiling means either the voters are idiots for not supporting the true defenders of Human Rights, or the 15% are idiots for supporting a failed Party with hollow promises and now Moral compass.
There was once a goupe of 13 provinces that finally agreed to Unite , the Document was Drafted and it took 11 years for all Party Signers to accept the terms .
This happened in 1776 and by 1787 the Creation of the United States Of America was born , it went through many changes and a Civil war along with ending Slavery and protecting the Nation by allowing the People to bare Arams to defend against Foreign invaders or homeland malitias/Terrorists that are a threat to Security and Democracy.
Jack Layton subscribes to the concept that Freedom is free and we only need to Flip the switch to the Democracy/Human Rights position and we can leave Afghanistan as if it's a Star Trek episode after Kirk and Spock solve all the problem and go on to the next Planet.
If Taliban-Jack wants to negotiate with the Taliban, then lets see how he reacts to sending Bill Siksay and Libby Davies as the Gay-Friendly team to re-educate the Shariah Law Taliban that have no quams with sliting the throats of Gays and feamles that offend Allah or Muhammed.
When Jack crusaded for the ban on Trans-fats
that are causing Obesity he was sure to avoid using Libby Davies as the Poster Person for
banning junk food Oils that harm our kids , so is it any surprise Jack is hiding his Homosexual MP's from dealing with the Taliban issue .
The NDP love to pick what hills are worth dying for and what ones can allow human rights violations to continue , the NDP keeps claiming to speak for Canada and yet can't get these voters to put them in Office, the 15% ceiling means either the voters are idiots for not supporting the true defenders of Human Rights, or the 15% are idiots for supporting a failed Party with hollow promises and now Moral compass.
You linked to a Simpson column on the Middle East. For 10 years now everything the man has written about anything outside of Canada has been wrong. Completely and irretreivably boneheaded to the max. yet the Globe continues to allow him to do it. Either they can't be bothered to stop him from making an ass of himself or they don't know better. My guess is both since it is the Globe after all.
The state of journalism in this country (and elsewhere) is pathetic. They're lazy, they don't bother to check their facts and they mistake their ill-informed opinions for insightful analysis. I've been involved with a number of events which were subsequently reported by the media. Each and every time they got it shockingly wrong. Worse than that, they spun the story to create controversy where none existed and didn't get their facts straight. It's a real eye-opener to see the standard of reportage that exists when you know what really happened. Doesn't inspire confidence, to say the least.
Jeffrey Simpson, Globe and Mail, UN report.
They're so 80s.
markg8 - for starters, I don't think that Iraq is "destroyed" nor are there a "million" dead in Iraq. Got a factual, verifiable, not-a-lame-discredited-lefty-agenda-driven-crap-site you can show us for those supporting facts? Like a paper-of-record on those statistics? (Google it. Google plus a brain are your friend.)
Let's just say that Saddam's sons inherited the country, like the Assad family in Syria, got any projections on the body count on that scenario over a few decades? Kurd deaths, Shiia deaths, hypotheticals like that based on past history?
You are throwing out there a lot of %'s without links, please share with us where you are getting them. Talks cheap, facts aren't.
And I loved this..."You and Yon can wax rhapsodic about the Brits turning another province over to a bunch of Arab mafia bosses but you're deluding yourselves."....tough words from an otherwise clueless wimp with lots of BS and no facts?
Waiting for the facts.....
Belisarius 8:03 PM, you are soooo correct about the pathetic state of media reporting.
I have seen it all my life. Along comes a news item that I happened to be very familiar with. Upon then seeing the media's take on it (newspaper, TV, whatever) I would say to myself, "where n' hell did they get that from !!??" Others around me would say the same thing.
Why the twisting and spinning and slanting and sometimes outright lying ?? To suit their agenda of media, govmit controls, I'm afraid. If it bleeds it leads ---- and it sells papers. Got be a Calamity Jane.
Pravda got away with it for a long time. Speaking of which. I sometomes go to Pravda english.I can honestly say their spin has nothing on most of Canada's media orgs.
Bad news from Afghanistan for Taliban Jack and his media cheerleaders.
Bad news for Taliban Jack and Deyawn but good news to my ears. The soldiers of the coalition and the statesmen leading those countries have successfully given the people of Iraq (starved, beaten, tortured and butchered by Saddam and his thugs) a reason to live!!
The nations that collaborated with Saddam are trying to hide their shameful selves - the msm are doing their best to make the thugs and human haters win. I often wonder how those people can look at themselves in the mirror. The msm are the 'nice comfy fur' people; they have never believed in anything except false prestige and $$. I guess they deserve our pity but I cannot bring myself to feel a pang of compassion.
What's that I hear? Someone comparing Iraq to the recently independent United States of America in 1783? That's so inaccurate it's crazy.
You guys simply refuse to quit don't you! Seventy percent of Americans have wised up to the lies and delusions of you bushlovers, and all your self-congratulatory hooting about your superior knowledge isn't going to change that.
It isn't funny anymore people, give it up. It's been longer for the US than World War II. Germany and Japan combined were more peaceful once significant military operations were concluded, than is Iraq today.
If you think it's so peaceful and so successful, why is bush II considering sending 40,000 more soldiers? Why does Iraq have millions of refugees? Why are there over one-hundred thousand dead?
You might believe that you're governments are implementing democratic reforms in Iraq and Afghanistan, but that's more a testament to your deep, unmanageable stupidity and gullibility than it is to anything going on in the real world.
Please, for your own sakes, give it up!
Kate, turn this site towards your real expertise; air-brushing trite designs and pet grooming. Cheer-leading this failed adventure and parsing MSM reports is beyond embarrassing.
It's amazing how impatient some people are to just give up and surrender. Pathetic.
The U.S. finally has a General commanding in Iraq who understands counterinsurgency, and the results are showing on the ground. The media reports speak of a "surge" as though there are just more soldiers being sent with no change in strategy and tactics. There has been very little reporting of the way the additional soldiers are being employed and the results achieved. Lazy journalism again. Michael Yon and a handful of others have put aside the easy cynicism and actually gone to Iraq to see what is happening. THAT is what good journalists do.
I really don't understand the comparisons being made in the media between the length of the conflict in Iraq and WWII. WWII was total war between nation states - with millions upon millions of soldiers and civilians dying. The Iraq war has been an insurgency since 2003. The military and political leadership in the U.S. has been saying since very early on that insurgencies take a long time to quell. Ten years is not uncommon, based on historical experience.
Rather than compare WWII to Iraq, perhaps the media should look at Malaysia (1948 - 1960), Peru (1980 - 1998), El Salvador (1981 - 1992), Algeria (1954 - 1962), Vietnam (1959 - 1975), Angola (1961 - 1989), Zimbabwe (1964 - 1980), China (1927 - 1949), etc.
Comparing the length of WWII to Iraq is comprehensively stupid.
The comparison is apt. The US occupation is so unpopular and so incompetent that it has failed to bring order to the country in more time than it took to the Americans to fight the Germans in World War II.
I fail to see why you brought in those comparisons, Vietnam, Algeria, China, etc., ... just off the top of my head, those long struggles resulted in victories for the forces that in the case of Iraq, would resemble the insurgencies and not the forces of the West.
In other words, your own examples point to FAILURES after long struggles, pointless, deadly struggles, rather than to anything supportive of your position.
What's comprehensively stupid is the way the denizens of this site continue to believe that this is an exercise in spreading democracy and that it's been a success.
The new US-written Iraqi oil law, the way you ignore the Iraqi Parliament call for a US withdrawal, all give the lie to claims about democracy, ... and the millions of refugees and hundred thousand plus dead, and your own mewling drivel about "progress" give the lie to claims of success.
Well said Belisarius. Are those who make the WWII comparisons suggesting that the coalition forces should firebomb or nuke Bagdad? Tehran? This pacified Germany and Japan rather quickly.
Thwap, you really shouldn't make statements "off the top of your head". Malaysia, Peru and El Salvador were all victories for the counterinsurgent forces. Algeria was a French military victory, but ultimately a political defeat as the government decided to depart anyway.
The other examples were defeats for the good guys. Democracies have a very difficult time defeating insurgencies, even if their cause is just. The long nature of these wars and the constant, slow accumulation of casualties wears down voters. This is the reason this type of war is a favourite of totalitarian, fascist movements such as al Qaeda, Shining Path, Nepali Maoists, etc.
As for progress - have you even read any of Michael Yon's pieces?
WRT idea that Japan surrendered after Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I've always thought that, but saw a documentary that showed Japan surrended after, soon after atomic bomb attacks, over 800 B29s flew over Tokyo without dropping a single bomb. Kind of interesting, eh?
Maybe the use of atomic weapons forestalled their use in future, because true horror of their use became known and they then became weapon of deterrence. I'm no historian, just musing here that action, and inaction, are decisions with consequences, and cannot be viewed in isolation.
Malaysia was a victory for the British, true. And they managed to wrest some development out of their oil and Japanese investment.
El Salvador and Peru were successes for your team, sure. But like Guatemala, they're nothing I'd like to crow about. I've got a thing against death squads. But to each their own.
Algeria and Vietnam might both have been military victories for the occupiers, but the political costs of such continued victories are beyond the stomach of a sane, democratic electorate.
No, I haven't read Yon's particular pieces of "steady progress" in Iraq. You see, there's been "steady progress" in Iraq for many, many, Friedmans, and I just don't have time for that garbage.
I'll bet you a Marvel No-Prize that Iraq will continue to be a disaster by the time bush II leaves office. I'm pretty confident I don't have to read wonder-boy Yon's articles, because, you see, you guys and your bogus sources were screeching about weapons of mass destruction for a year, and I never believed a word of it, and me and my team turned out to be right, and you guys all had egg on your faces.
This will be more of the same, and, again, I don't have time for more of your nonsense.
Actually thwap, I agreed with you and "your team" back in 2003 that the invasion was a bad idea. War should always be an absolute last resort, and back then not only was the case for war very weak but the alternatives hadn't been exhausted.
But that was 2003. This is 2007, and circumstances have changed dramatically. The war has become a lightning rod for al Qaeda and Islamic fundamentalists.
I think if you read a wider range of articles you might find that the news isn't all bad. Yes the outcome is very much still in doubt, but I don't think there is any question that progress has been made in establishing security in many parts of Iraq. The whole point of my original comment was that the media has taken a position based on ignorance and cynicism. Honest reporting is required.
As for Iraq, don't you agree that a peaceful, democratic government in that country would be best for all concerned? I think much of the debate needs to shift from events of 2003 to the consequences of withdrawl today, both for the people of Iraq and the world.
Certainly a peaceful, democratic government in Iraq is to be hoped for. I see the American presence as a hindrance to that.
And while I thank you for the reasonable exchange, I must go to work.
Yes Thwap cause the only thing standing in the way of happy, peace-loving democrats singing campsongs in Iraq while demanding gay rights and women's suffrage is the George Bush.
What do you leftards think will result from an american withdrawal? Really.
I peeked in at work, hoping to see a friendly rejoinder from Belisarius, and thus, the end of a respectful dialogue.
Instead, I get your "leftard" drivel.
You're not as bright as you imagine yourself to be Warwick. No, stoopid, what's standing in the way of a happy, peaceful, democratic Iraq, is the United States in a big way.
Supporting ethnic-based militias, raping young girls and murdering their families, shooting and bombing indiscriminately, backing a puppet government and ramming through legislation allowing Western oil companies access to Iraqi's national heritage.
You have been proven wrong. For years now. It's all over for you and your imaginary credibility. You, sda, Yon, etc., can all tell me about the wonderful "progress" bush II is making now, like you've been doing all along.
Nobody takes you seriously anymore. Nobody.
What's that? It's not about oil, but about spreading democracy? I'm sorry Warwick, I thought I was dealing with someone with more sense than that. I'll leave you to your ravings.
So, Shamrock, opposing the continued occupation of Iraq is Anti Semitic, can you explain that to me, I'm feeling a little think this morning.
As for the rest, I have to agree with thwap, despite his colourful comments. It is all fucked up in Iraq, and saying any different just proves how far in denial you are. M.Yon is yet another deluded shill for the war party. And if your looking for serious analysis, go check out Juan Cole, then come back and discuss.