[Dean's World] Dean: The News That Wasn't

[notify at powerblogs.com]

Posted by Dean:
The News That Wasn't
http://www.deanesmay.com/posts/1141214631.shtml


   In what has to be the most jaw-droppingly funny headline of the year
   to date, unpartisan.com says that [1]intelligence officials "warned"
   in 2003 that there might be civil unrest in Iraq. This is the sort of
   thing that makes me either laugh or cry whenever I see it. It's what
   makes me sick to death of writing about the situation in Iraq. Because
   it's a phony-baloney bit of "news" that is in no way news. It is the
   rough equivalent of reporting, "experts warned that Bush might win
   2004 election." Well duh.

   Anybody who was actually reading or watching the news in 2003 knows
   perfectly well that there were such warnings. The American people were
   given such warnings repeatedly at that time. Including repeated
   warnings from the administration as well as from political leaders on
   both sides of the aisle in Congress.

   The President himself said it quite well on his famous aircraft
   carrier speech. You know, the one where he supposedly said that our
   mission was accomplished in Iraq, when in fact that's the [2]exact
   opposite of what he said?

   "We have difficult work to do in Iraq. We are bringing order to parts
   of that country that remain dangerous. We are pursuing and finding
   leaders of the old regime, who will be held to account for their
   crimes. We have begun the search for hidden chemical and biological
   weapons, and already know of hundreds of sites that will be
   investigated. We are helping to rebuild Iraq, where the dictator built
   palaces for himself, instead of hospitals and schools. And we will
   stand with the new leaders of Iraq as they establish a government of,
   by, and for the Iraqi people. The transition from dictatorship to
   democracy will take time, but it is worth every effort. Our coalition
   will stay until our work is done. And then we will leave =E2 and we will
   leave behind a free Iraq."

   You want me to point to more statements by the administration
   throughout 2003 and 2004 where we were told repeatedly that there was
   a violent insurgency and it was going to take time to deal with it?
   Why bother? We'll still be treated to phoney-baloney "news" stories
   about how "experts" (you mean experts like the President?) warned that
   we had difficult work ahead and would have to work to pacify elements
   within the country that want to restore Saddam-style fascism (or
   implement new, Iranian-style theocratic fascism)?

   In 2003, no one with an IQ above room temperature ever believed we'd
   have anything but a difficult situation on our hands. No one. The only
   ones who claimed otherwise were dishonest partisans who always
   themselves believed this would be difficult, but pretended that the
   American pople believed it would be a "cakewalk" (big lie, no one told
   us that), that Saddam was behind 9/11 (another big lie, no one told us
   that), that we'd be greeted with flowers (actually, we were in most of
   the country, but everyone knew parts of it would remain hostile,
   particularly the areas loyal to Saddam), and so on.

   One of the reasons I so hate writing about Iraq is not the arguments.
   It's puncturing the same lies over and over and over and over again.

   Meanwhile, David at [3]In Search Of Utopia has been trying for days
   now to convince people that Iraq has erupted into a civil war. Well,
   he gets at least one thing right: numbers don't lie. There is no sane
   historical perspective which supports the notion that Iraq is
   embroiled in a civil war. All you need do is look at how few of the
   fascist "insurgents" they really are, the tiny number of casualties
   compared to other wars, and the fact that the so-called "warriors"
   (i.e. fascist murdering thugs) are increasingly turning to murdering
   children, international aid workers, and other noncombatants, as well
   as bombing holy sites in a desperate attempt to provoke a civil war (a
   civil war that, to their frustration, keeps not erupting), to know
   there is nothing going on here but vile and vicious terrorist attacks
   from those who hate democracy and hate human rights.

   So it's a simple question really: do we run like scared puppies from
   this cowardly and puny fascist "insurgency" that can only make
   progress by giving photo ops to the press and bombing innocent
   non-combatants? Do we abandon the Iraqi people to fascism, washing our
   hands of them and concluding that they're just backward Arabs and
   Muslims who deserve fascist rule? Or do we finish the job?

   In closing, I'll just say, [4]I agree with Victor Davis Hanson.

References

   1. http://www.unpartisan.com/articles.php?id=3D16567
   2. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/05/01/iraq/main551946.shtml
   3. http://www.grupo-utopia.com/blog/isou/archives/2006/02/from_the_nyt_b=
a.php
   4. http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=3D110008030