IDIOTIC ARTICLE:
"Staunch supporters of the Bush administration's policy in Iraq have become more vocal with their concern over the way things are going."
NOPE. The ones who get the air-time are the ones who are NOT supporters. Most supporters see the progress made and support continuing until we win.
"Andrew Bacevich, a Vietnam veteran and professor of international relations at Boston University, said he sees a marked shift. "There are people who view themselves on the right, who were enthusiastic supporters of the war, who are now greatly concerned that the Bush administration or more in particular, the military, is losing its focus, its heart, and isn't fully committed," he told Fox News."
More hogwash. Why doesn't this article mention, even briefly the fact that we killed hundreds of terrorists in recent days, the fact that constitutional elections are scheduled, that the Iraqi army improves each day, etc.? There clearly is a commitment to win using a strategy of giving more responsibility for security to Iraqi forces as they are able to take it up.
"President Bush has said repeatedly there will be no exit timetable, but some of his supporters are saying the White House needs to be clearer about its strategy."
Another semantic bait-and-switch. No time-table because there is no plan to exit until the job is done, but a clear strategy of training the Iraqi security forces, establishing the legitimate democratic Government of Iraq, and rebuilding the country so Iraq is a free, sovereign, stable nation.
"Peter Beinart, editor of The New Republic, said Republicans have become more vocal about needing clarification on the war strategy and a better explanation to the American public."
A Liberal notes that some Republicans, seeing the media bias, want better PR campaign from the White House. I'm underwhelmed. The false implication is that there isn't a 'war strategy', which is a lie. There is one and it is executed every day.
"But Republican pollster David Winston cautioned against interpreting concern over war strategy as skittishness from the President's base and a lack of support for war overall. "There is still support for this war," Winston said. What people are looking for from the president, he said, are more specifics and measures for success."
This statement is a fair assessment. The Bush white house, gun-shy about making specific claims of success, due to the media ignoring those proven right and emphasizing nay claim that later founders, has fallen back to generalities and bromides. It's a pity. If the President were to announce what I've mentioned, that we killed a number of top terrorist leaders in Iraq in recent months, that the Iraqi army now has more battalions in active pursuit of terrorists than ever before ... that would mean something.
This article distorts lack of PR for a strategy into 'lack of strategy'. I hate media bias.
Good rebutal. Thanks. As our and the Iraqi forces relentlessly cream the remaining local and foreign insurgents and the Iraqi border is effectively closed, then the voting over the constituion goes through etc., more crap will have to be generated by so called experts. One things for certain, the L/MSM cannot allow any positive comments about the Iraqi SASO to leak out. All they do is do a real quick report on something like Tal Afar, so they don't appear fully neglegent.
Meantion that some alleged freedom fighters appear to have been injured, and five Iraqi soldiers killed in action, with treats of terrible consequencies if the US/Iraq army do not pull out. And the masses of morons follow the shit like a fly goes to jelly. Tis life in the good old US of A.