IRAQ: Media Clings to BDS
"Strategy that is making Iraq safer was snubbed for years"
Bruce writes the following in response to the above leftarded comment in today's article (JOURNALISM!) in USA TODAY, on-line edition:
"Strategy that is making Iraq safer was snubbed for years" I saw the print copy in our office cafeteria and the opening paragraph of course specifically said Bush Admin resisted the idea for years (not in the on-line edition). Alternatively, the print headline noticeably (to me) used the word "safe" (not "safer", as above) . The narrative on Iraq has changed. The Bush bashing likely never will.
Ben explains;
There is a very different way of interpreting this. The constant, close patroling of residential neighborhoods, according to popular... er... media wisdom, was supposedly the thing that pissed off Iraqis the most, as it was "intrusive". Our presence supposedly stoked the insurgency, and the talking heads on the Left wanted us to have a lower profile. (Or no profile at all, Murtha wanted us to patrol... from Okinawa and Guam.) So now we see, intrusiveness and presence is what Iraq wanted (and needed) all along? And we also see, that those who told us that our presence was creating the insurgency were lying. Now that the facts are in, it is clear that the insurgency flourishes in our absence, while our presence surpresses it.
But on a deeper, more accurate level, I can say that the USA today article is Bullshit. The plan was always to work up the networks. It's how we bagged Saddam and many of the high muckedy mucks. They ALWAYS work up the network. The only difference is now we're getting better at it- four years of data bases being built, contacts being made, and the little fish getting caught and squealing about who the bigger fish are, who get caught and give away the still bigger fish, etc, etc. A LOT has to do with changing perceptions of civilians who are an important intel asset. (US Army counterinsurgency intelligence textbooks mention old women as being the best "neighborhood" intel sources.) With the insurgent side slowly being crushed and more and more of the young radicals not surviving to become old radicals, and the threat of insurgent reprisals falling while cell phones make anonymous tips more anonymous, the neighborhoods were won, and the locals shifted sides. This was not a simple overnight change of tactics, but many long term factors. Al Queda helped- by being inhumanly cruel even to fellow Sunni muslims, they gave Iraqis incentives to turn against them. And it takes years to create a competent (or semi competent) local security force in the middle east. Yet, USA Today, in it's absolute cluelessness, thinks that somehow, this was all due to a simple change in tactics- one day, some smart guy said "hey, why don't we try to get at the enemy leadership?" and everyone slapped foreheads and said "golly, why didn't I think of that?"
*BDS: Bush Derangement Syndrome.
UPDATE: OT but related: : Check out this video "US military gets video of Iraqui Torture House" at redlasso hat tip ejo
UPDATE:
| 12/18/2007 U.S. Army Col. Tom James | |
| |









The Iraqis....just about all of them, are the enemies of the West. It is no secret (As the Iran-Iraq Parliamentary discussions this week made very clear)that the Iraqis are being trained and armed by the United States..to take on their ONLY ENEMY (Israel)in the Baker-Bushki "Final Solution" to the Jewish problem.
Ol' Ben stands squarely on the side of the enemy and is so arrogant about his ignorance, that he actually allows his (plagiarised from countless other useful idiots) thoughts to be published.
Wake up folks......the end is nigh!
Eid Mubarak
Posted by: Miluimnik | Wednesday, December 19, 2007 at 07:18 PM
Dear Pamela;
You know in San Francisco Santa says, "Hi, Hi, Hi"!
Thanks for the hat tip.
Sincerely;
EJO
Posted by: EJO | Wednesday, December 19, 2007 at 09:38 PM