Actual Nuance From a NYT Reporter On Improvements In Iraq

Worth reading in full. He mixes both upside and downside news but one has the sense he's basically on the level, if not necessarily correct about everything. The basic thrust is that the current situation is a "fragile calm," which could be disrupted, horribly, at a moment's notice. Something I wouldn't leap to disagree with.

CJ, who tips this, is critical of it:

Take a look at the question about positioning themselves for the next battle. It's complicated. it's fragile. It's not a bunch of psychopathic monsters plotting their next genocide. No one should present it that way.

... but I think that's forgivable, especially from a NYT reporter. These are, after all, people who are almost uncannily gifted at seeing the point of view and understanding the grievances of every group on the face of the earth... except Americans, of course.

But that's why we have an adversarial alternate media.

CJ Writes... to say I misunderstood what he was saying:

Actually I wasn't being critical of this report at all. From what I've read from Yon and Bill InDC it's on the money. Who I was trying to be critical of were the people who are using the New Yorker piece, which Damien specifically disavows to argue that Iraqis are simply using America to preapre for another civil war. Damien in fact says it's way to early to predict that. Ardolino seem to say that it is way too ealry to predict that to, as does Yon.

Some people though are happy to predict away (as in the recent New Yorker article cited at Hot Air) and claim that America has made Sadr King of Iraq. Something else that BillinDC and the rest seem to say is not the case. That's what I was criticizing.

(Lightly edited to include link and such.)

Sorry, CJ. Misunderstood ya.

posted by Ace at 07:06 PM

| Access Comments