The only problem is, the Surge hasn't worked. It hasn't worked by a long shot. Read my previous blog on this subject. Basically the drop in violence in Iraq can mostly be attributed to three things. First, "successful" ethnic cleansing in Iraq under our watch. The fighting decreased because the militias largely finished their job in killing or expelling the opposing ethnic groups from mixed neighborhoods and areas. The result, hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians dead, and around 4.5 million Iraqi refugees. If that is "success", then pop the champaign, but it wasn't the doing of the Surge. Secondly, the US started buying off Sunni militias and arming them, to get them to fight against al-Qaeda. Yes, we gave our previous enemies weapons and money in exchange for their temporary support. And when they eventually want to use those weapons and that money against us, or against fellow Iraqis again, I guess that'll be written off as an "oops". But certainly that wasn't part of the Surge. Thirdly, Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr declared a unilateral cease-fire to regroup, but has always remained on the verge of returning to violence, and it is certainly able to at any time.
For more on those, read my previous blog where I outlined the non-success of the Surge. What really led me to write this post, however, was how the media is eating all of this pro-Surge nonsense up. A fellow Kossack wrote an epithet-laden diatribe against the media, specifically aimed at Andrea Mitchell, and I think it was absolutely appropriate. He or she, like many others, including myself, is absolutely sick of how absurdly biased in favor of McCain. This Kossack shares my exasperation. It is beyond ridiculous. It is insanity at this point.
Luckily not everyone on MSNBC is as incompetent, so I'd like to give kudos to Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow, who both hit the nail on the head on Countdown just now when reviewing how wrong McCain has been on Iraq and Afghanistan, and really how perfectly everything is falling behind Obama during his trip overseas. Keith made an excellent point when he highlighted the paradox that McCain insists that the Surge has been a success, yet we can't withdraw for years to come, even though the very goal of the Surge was to be able to leave a sovereign Iraqi government in place! He can't have it both ways, yet the vast majority of the media seems to want to let him have it both ways. Maddow quite aptly pointed out that McCain and Bush are now defining success in Iraq by us staying in Iraq, while Obama is defining success by getting out of Iraq.
Perhaps the best part was Rachel Maddow pointing out exactly what I pointed out on Saturday, that both Bush and McCain have previously committed to withdrawing our troops from Iraq when a sovereign Iraqi government tells us to leave, which is exactly what their Prime Minister just said the Iraqis wanted. I'd like to think she reads my blog, but that probably isn't very likely (psst, Rachel, leave me a blog comment if it's you!). Looking back, here was Bush:
"We are there at the invitation of the Iraqi government. This is a sovereign nation. Twelve million people went to the polls to approve a constitution. It's their government's choice," the president said during a Rose Garden news conference. "If they were to say 'leave', we would leave."And McCain:
QUESTION: Let me give you a hypothetical, senator. What would or should we do if, in the post-June 30th period, a so-called sovereign Iraqi government asks us to leave, even if we are unhappy about the security situation there? I understand it's a hypothetical, but it's at least possible.Yeahhh....
McCAIN: Well, if that scenario evolves, then I think it's obvious that we would have to leave because— if it was an elected government of Iraq— and we've been asked to leave other places in the world. If it were an extremist government, then I think we would have other challenges, but I don't see how we could stay when our whole emphasis and policy has been based on turning the Iraqi government over to the Iraqi people.
Anyway, I'm going to watch Maddow tear McCain up on his lies about oil prices... (You see, McCain is blaming Obama for high gas prices because he doesn't support offshore drilling, never mentioning that HE didn't support it either, until his recent flip-flop, and never mentioning that every economist and even Bush acknowledges that drilling out have no effect on gas prices for many many years, and even then it would have no effect. This is a perfect example of how the mainstream media gives McCain a free pass on his absurd lies and distortions, while only a very few, like Maddow, actually set the record straight. This isn't anti-McCain or pro-Obama, it is pro-reality. Sadly most of the media is committed to expunging all reality from their reporting. Oh, and for the record McCain, the price of oil increased nearly 600% since Bush took office, after being relatively flat for decades. Now who is responsible? Furthermore, who supports the exact same policies that led to those skyrocketing oil prices? Here's a hint: It isn't Obama.)
I'll put up some video if I can find it. (Got it:)
Now THAT'S journalism (disregard Howard Fineman's fallacious conventional wisdom about the Surge "working", and once again, read my previous blog on this, because "improvements" in Iraq have next to nothing to do with the Surge). And here's some more journalism:
It is time for MSNBC to get rid of Joe Scarborough or David Gregory and give Rachel Maddow their time spot, because neither of them hold a candle to Maddow, especially Scarborough, he himself is a former Republican congressman, so it is not surprising he is nothing but a Republican shill pumping the GOP propaganda on MSNBC. In fact, be proactive, sign the petition calling for MSNBC to give Maddow her own show!
0 comments:
Post a Comment