A 'Forgotten' War; As Iraq Improves, Coverage Dries Up

[mikesilvia]

Got this in an e-mail and thought I would share. I agree 100% with the author.

New York Post
November 13, 2007

A 'Forgotten' War
As Iraq Improves, Coverage Dries Up

By Ralph Peters

LAST weekend's news coverage of our veterans was welcome, but deceptive.

The "mainstream media" honored aging heroes and noted the debt we owe to today's wounded warriors - but deftly avoided in-depth coverage from
Iraq. Why? Because things are going annoyingly well.

All those reporters, editors and producers who predicted - longed for - an American defeat have moved on to more pressing strategic issues, such as O.J.'s latest shenanigans.

Oh, if you turned to the inner pages of the "leading" newspapers, you found grudging mention of the fact that roadside-bomb attacks are down by half and indirect-fire attacks by three-quarters while the number of suicide bombings has plummeted.

Far fewer Iraqi civilians are dying at the hands of extremists. U.S. and Coalition casualty rates have fallen dramatically. The situation has changed so unmistakably and so swiftly that we should be reading proud headlines daily.

Where are they? Is it really so painful for all those war-porno journos to accept that our military - and the Iraqis - may have turned the situation around? Shouldn't we read and see and hear a bit of praise for today's soldiers and the prog- ress they're making?

The media's new trick is to concentrate coverage on our wounded, mouthing platitudes while using military amputees as props to suggest that, no matter what happens in Iraq, everything's still a disaster.

God knows, I sympathize with - and respect - those who've sacrificed life or limb in our country's service. I just hate to see them used as political tools.

How many of you really believe that those perfectly coiffed reporters care about our soldiers and their families? Does anyone think those news anchors will invite any Marines in wheelchairs home for Thanksgiving?

Still, for the 100-proof nastiness of the intelligentsia, you have to move to the "entertainment" world. Hollywood declines to make a single movie about any of our Medal of Honor winners in Iraq - but has deluged us with left-wing diatribes, as activist actors and directors parade by with their limp bayonets fixed.

"Stars" who enjoy incredible privileges that our troops will never experience treat us to vicious propaganda - such flicks as "In The Valley Of Elah," "Rendition" and the released-on-Veterans'-Day-weekend (gee, thanks) "Lions For Lambs."

And then there's the forthcoming "Redacted," which wants us to grasp that our psychopathic military's basic skills are the rape and murder of innocent civilians.

Immeasurably self-important, Hollywood tells itself these movies are acts of courage.

In some of the films, the victims - of their own leaders - are our troops. In others, the victims are innocent Muslims falsely linked to terrorism. But the unifying thread is that the only heroes are stay-at-homes who bravely fight for the truth.

A number of critics have noted that the American people refuse to pay an
hour's wages to see these films. Last weekend's release, "Lions For Lambs," earned less than $7 million, despite starring Tom Cruise, Robert Redford and Meryl "America's in Peril" Streep. And that was the big-bucks earner so far.

Scriptwriters, directors and vanity-project actors (how many have been to Iraq?) scratch their heads and deplore our apathy. They fail to grasp what's truly happening: We, the citizens and moviegoers, simply reject these films' underlying message.

Because the real message of all of these in-the-toilet flicks isn't just that the war in Iraq or the struggle against Islamist terrorists is bad - it's that America is evil. At best, we're the moral equivalent of our enemies.

You know down in your guts that isn't true. I know it isn't true. But the Reese Witherspoons and Tommy Lee Joneses, the Charlize Therons and Robert Redfords have a clearer perspective from Malibu and Sundance than
we do: America not only isn't worth defending; we're a danger to all humanity. Our troops are the semi-literate tools of the powerful.

Well, the names on the marquees come and go, but our troops are always there for us. In good times and bad, those in uniform see us through. And, yes, our troops are defending the right of wealthy fools to make goofball propaganda films insulting them.

Now listen to what a real soldier (no makeup, no script), the assistant division commander of the U.S. Army's 1st Cavalry Division in Baghdad, had to say about the changes on the ground in Iraq during an internal end-of-tour interview: "As we've changed the environment for the Iraqis, the Iraqis are the bigger part of the solution now - and I don't mean the security forces [but] the population."

Brig.-Gen. Vincent Brooks stressed that the citizens have learned that "extremists of any ilk" are the real threat: "They've tasted what happens when those elements are sidelined. They long for the glory days of Baghdad, they really do."

An impressive soldier and a man of conscience, Brooks acknowledged to his staff that the months ahead "will be difficult." Success "will be challenged for indigenous reasons and, frankly, for external reasons, by those who don't want to see Iraq be stable and prosperous."

But the general stressed his belief that "the Iraqi people can do this." That's Hollywood's nightmare. And the "mainstream" media's.

Ralph Peters' latest book is "Wars of Blood and Faith."

[OnePimpTiger]

Nobody wants to disagree when the owner posts it! :)

I agree 110%...and it's not just now. Since the beginning, the media has vastly over-reported the negative aspects and vastly under-reported the positive aspects of the war in Iraq.

And I've always loved how the great political and philosophical minds like Susan Sarandon, Tom Cruise, George Clooney, Robert Redford (Sundance! I'm so disappointed in you!), etc have been able to take time out of their busy schedules of LA elite parties and pampering on Rodeo Drive to let us poor simpletons know what the world should be like. They're so far out of touch with reality it's laughable.

I remember an email I received a long time ago, probably around when the war in Iraq first started being protested, and it had a list of the actor activists and their credentials (high school dropout, college dropout, or the ones that actually did finish college had a drama degree) vs. the political leaders of the time and their credentials (masters in political science, graduates from Harvard, Yale, military academies, etc.)...to me that put everything in perfect perspective...shut up and entertain us, you dancing monkeys.

[Bonds_25]

Death tolls continue to rise, yet things are improving? I believe I read/heard the other day that this past month was one of the deadliest as far as American casualties go since the start of the war.

While I understand liberating a nation is honorable, it is time we leave. Iraq is never going to be free of violence. The longer we stay there, the more resources and money we waste and the more lives we lose.

You can't invade a nation and force your own ideals onto them. While we may view democracy as the greatest thing on earth, it doesn't give us the right to force it upon another nation. I realize Iraqis didn't exactly have a choice of how their country was led under Saddam's dictatorship. However, how would Americans like if another nation came in and implemented an entirely different government in our homeland?

Our two cultures are always going to clash and to think we can force our culture onto them without continued violence is laughable.

The time has come to cut our losses and move on. This country has enough problems of its own right now, many of them caused by the economic costs of this war.

[mikesilvia]

Death tolls continue to rise, yet things are improving? I believe I read/heard the other day that this past month was one of the deadliest as far as American casualties go since the start of the war.

Well, if you have a single death, the total death toll rises. I have 7 of my troops in the Middle East right now, 2 in Baghdad, 1 in Afghanistan and the others I won't mention. The death toll is no where near the highest death toll since the war started. Not even close. There was a report however that said the worst 2 years of American deaths in the past 25 years was in 1981-82 when we we NOT at war, even higher than the worst 2 years in Iraq (2004-05 I think). Unless you watch Fox News you would have missed that one!

While I understand liberating a nation is honorable, it is time we leave. Iraq is never going to be free of violence. The longer we stay there, the more resources and money we waste and the more lives we lose.

I agree it is time to start withdrawals soon, but phased over time. I do remember the famous Bill Clinton words in Bosnia of how, "The troops will be home by Christmas." I guess he didn't mention what Christmas because we still have troops there 10+ years later!

You can't invade a nation and force your own ideals onto them. While we may view democracy as the greatest thing on earth, it doesn't give us the right to force it upon another nation. I realize Iraqis didn't exactly have a choice of how their country was led under Saddam's dictatorship. However, how would Americans like if another nation came in and implemented an entirely different government in our homeland?

As long as you, me and other Americans use oil, we will continue to be involved int he Middle East. That is a fact of life. Resources are only getting more scarce and as long as Americans insist on buying SUVs, Hummers and fly planes we will rely on oil imported.

Our two cultures are always going to clash and to think we can force our culture onto them without continued violence is laughable.

How have we forced our culture on them? Have we invaded and forced them to convert to Christianity, listen to our music and stop acting like Iraqis? Not at all.

The time has come to cut our losses and move on. This country has enough problems of its own right now, many of them caused by the economic costs of this war.

Cut our losses? How so? We would have even more losses just running away from our problem and going against our word. As a nation, America lost a lot more than troops when it decided to cut its losses in Vietnam. The military was looked down upon throughout the late 70s and 80s and our image around the world was devastated while encouraging Russia to overthrow another dozen countries because of our weakness.

If you think that by leaving Iraq we are solving our problems with Islamic terrorists you could not be more wrong. It will embolden them to keep going and drive their recruitments 10 fold because they would claim credit for our defeat in Iraq.

I say with our surge working and Iraqis finally making a push to take back their country we support our troops and President to show terrorists that we are a united country, not one that tries to use Iraq for political gains.

[tnopud42]

"I agree it is time to start withdrawals soon, but phased over time. I do remember the famous Bill Clinton words in Bosnia of how, 'The troops will be home by Christmas.' I guess he didn't mention what Christmas because we still have troops there 10+ years later!"

I always found this to be a bogus argument. Bush has had eight years to bring those troops home. If our presence in Bosnia is such an issue, he should have acted on it.


'I say with our surge working and Iraqis finally making a push to take back their country we support our troops and President to show terrorists that we are a united country, not one that tries to use Iraq for political gains."

Your "political gains" comment refers to whom?

[mikesilvia]

I always found this to be a bogus argument. Bush has had eight years to bring those troops home. If our presence in Bosnia is such an issue, he should have acted on it.

Bush did NOT promise to bring them home, Clinton did. So, the argument is 100% valid.

'I say with our surge working and Iraqis finally making a push to take back their country we support our troops and President to show terrorists that we are a united country, not one that tries to use Iraq for political gains."

Well, since it is mostly Democrats that have tried to bring the troops home due to the a small minority of anti-war folks in America, I would say Ted Kennedy and most of the left leaning Democrats. Not all Democrats (like Joe Lieberman and some others), but the ones that work for moveon.org. I'm actually impressed with Pelosi lately because even she is fed up with anti-war folks camping out on her sidewalk.

They know that going on TV and slamming a President in time of war and saying that the mission in Iraq is hopeless (when it isn't) only aids the enemy. Supporting our troops should be job #1, not providing video and audio propaganda to the enemy.

[mikesilvia]

Those that are completely against the war in Iraq, how many have actually been there? How many have access to classified information? How many think the terrorists will not try to kill Americans when we leave Iraq? We were not in Iraq when 9-11 happened, so let's not fool ourselves into thinking "things will be great and get better if we just leave Iraq."

I have been to the Middle East 6 times for 3-6 months at a time and have several troops there now who e-mail me daily. They love their mission there and one of my troops requested to extend 3 months because he feels strongly in the mission. I will likely serve 6 months in Iraq in 2008 and I will go gladly. I will miss doing my websites, but I believe in the mission there and I don't just talk about it.

I say if our men and women feel they are doing a good thing and want to continue the fight, let them. Reading US news when 90% of the journalists are against the war in Iraq is far from getting informed. Talk to some troops in Iraq and you get a different perspective.

[tnopud42]

Sorry, but it's not valid. I'm not even sure what point your trying to make - that Clinton didn't have the troops home by Christmas, that he misspoke. Gee, politicains never do that, do they? Clinton, himself, acknowledge that he shouldn't have promised troops were to be home on any given time table. Was there some other point you were trying to make?

And you don't believe Republicans have politicized the war?

"We were not in Iraq when 9-11 happened" ???? Your point?

From the same author - http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2006/11/post_6.html

[doniceage]

Mike and Roland at it again boy you guys just disagree to disagree.

DON

[OnePimpTiger]

Clinton, himself, acknowledge that he shouldn't have promised troops were to be home on any given time table.

If you agree with this point, do you also agree that Bush shouldn't have a given time table to have the troops home from Iraq?

It's just like everything else the Democrats do (and a lot of Republicans)...they want the best of both worlds.

They want the government to implement all of these high and mighty programs providing universal health care, etc, yet complain when taxes go up.

They want to save the environment and reduce global warming, yet aren't willing to give up their SUVs.

They want to help the Iraqi people and get rid of Saddam, but don't want to put in the time and effort to ensure a stable government to make sure a Saddam II doesn't step right in and pick up where things left off.

They want the country to be safe from terrorists, but complain and protest when we go to fight the terrorists in their land instead of waiting for them to come to ours...

It's the same old story...and they never make the connection that if Clinton had finished the job and killed Bin Laden when he had multiple chances, the situation wouldn't be as bad now.

I'm friends with a guy who's now a sniper in the Navy SEALs...he was just deployed to Iraq for the third time a few weeks ago. I talked to him 3 days before he left and he was excited about going and said he would re-enlist for another however many years if he did not have a baby girl...he believes in what we're doing over there and sees first hand that it is working....not just listening to what the biased media says like most of the anti-war folks.

I've heard tons of stories about soldiers who have seen with their own eyes that what they are doing is right and how thankful the Iraqi people are that we are there helping them...but I haven't heard any of those stories on CNN, MSNBC, etc....

And thanks Mike and pass my thanks on to your guys over there now for what you and they are doing. Unlike a lot of people who say they support the troops and then disparage everything they do, I appreciate and support you guys 100%! Keep up the great work!