November 09, 2007
Non-News From Iraq
By Rich Galen

There is an old saying: "What if a tree fell in the forest and nobody came?" Or, as Samuel Johnson once wrote, words to a like effect.

The news out of Iraq, Wednesday, was that there was no news out of Iraq. At least no news that the New York Times wanted to particularly feature, doing everything it could to be certain that readers would not be around to hear that tree fall.

We have previously discussed the matter of the Times editorializing by placement. As another example, this was the squib in the teaser box on the front page of Thursday's paper: Rebel Force Out of Baghdad: American Troops have routed Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia from every neighborhood of Baghdad, the commander of United States forces in Baghdad says.

Not the front page. Not the second nor third nor fourth page. Page 19. Following a four-page advertisement by the Siemens Corporation.

And the non-news was unambiguous as the opening paragraph by Damien Cave attests:

"American forces have routed Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, the Iraqi militant network, from every neighborhood in Baghdad a top American General said today, allowing American troops involved in the 'surge' to depart as planned."

Routed. Every. Planned.

Not "making headway against." Routed.

Not "some neighborhoods." Every.

Not "leave in disgrace." Depart as planned.

Am I misreading the reporting here? If this is true, this isn't just pretty good news, this is extraordinary news. This is GREAT news.

Here's what it is not: It is not Page A19 news.

The commander, Major General John Fils told reporters that "murder victims are down 80% from the peak and attacks involving improvised bombs are down 70%." Among other things he gave credit to "the Iraqis' rejection of 'the rule of the gun.'"

To be fair, MG Fils said that "the biggest threat to Baghdad security is now Shiite militias" and not Al Qaeda, but he also said that 2008 would be "a year of reconstruction, a year of infrastructure repair, a year of - if there's going to be a surge - a year of a surge in the economy."

The question, then, becomes: Will Iraq be as important an election issue next November as the news media believes it is this November?

Who is helped and who is hurt if Iraq is still a major issue; and what is the calculus if it has faded to the Page A19 of Americans' consciousness?

At the Presidential level on the Democratic side, a fading Iraq hurts both Obama and Edwards. It would be difficult to sell the "Troops Out Now!" line if an orderly withdrawal - signifying success - is underway.

It helps Clinton because her vote to authorize military action in the first place is not nearly so onerous to Democratic primary voters.

On the Republican side it probably helps everyone but Ron Paul. Success in Iraq helps George W. If his approval numbers begin to climb into the mid- to high-forties then whoever the GOP candidate is runs with more confidence.

At the Congressional level, the Harry Reid (D-Nevada) wing of the Democratic Party looks even more spineless than it does today if the President's "surge" strategy continues to produce positive results.

If that is the case incumbents like Sen. John Sununu (R-NH) look decidedly stronger in their re-election bids, meaning massive Democratic increases in the US House and Senate are far less likely.

First, though, the White House has to help sell the story of success in Iraq. The White House alone has the capacity to move the Success in Iraq story from page A19 to page A1.

You definitely get an A for effort. Unfortunately, its lost on those that only wish for the bad to be reported.
I can see it now...the post will be something like..."Oh please, you knuckle-dragging conservative! Everybody knows the NY Times is just a republican propaganda machine. Especially A19...its always where they put the republican lies."

This is my take in a nut shell, fellas.

The more good news (and less bad news) out of Iraq, the better. It means that we can get our people out of there that much sooner...and, of course, the Iraqis deserve peace. I'm still not very optimistic that Iraq is going to end up much better than Egypt or Pakistan and I'm still not sure that violence won't escalate again at some point.

As far as the big picture goes from the US perspective, it could be nothing but rainbows and lolly pops tomorrow in Iraq....and I still think the decision to invade Iraq and the way we did it was a colossal fuck up of the worst kind....no way around it. Hopefully, we learn from this...the problem is we seem to have a short memory span when it comes to military endeavors...on the order of about 30-40 years.

__________________
The Lone Ranger of the AWE liberal elitists.....who was that masked man???
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


And now, I'm the Elitist of liberal Elitists...

The memory span is way shorter ,almost non-existant.
Invading Iran sees to be a topic of discussion at the moment!!!

__________________
I respect your right to have your own opinion,but I do not necessarily respect your opinion.

What a fair statement and I agree with a lot of it with the exception of the inital decision to invade but who cares? A very thoughtful post!

Sadly, there are a lot of people who are so invested in the failure and misery of this particular President that their hatred leaks into the soldiers who are only doing their jobs. That's the sick and sad part.

Normans response was very thoughtful and fair and I agree with him. I even agree that, in hindsight, the decision to go to war was a very bad one. That being said, it shows that rational, intelligent beings can disagree with going to war without wishing for the worst for political reasons.
The hatred and loathing expressed by some on this forum for the military is sick and sad.
You would think that, as norman pointed out, good news would be welcome since it would mean our troops are closer to coming home.
Instead, many of the ranters only see any good news from Iraq as bad for their partisan agenda. Therefore, it must be hidden. Sad.

L.....o.....v.....e I.....t

__________________
When seconds count, Police are only minutes away.

It just shows that there are intelligent people who can agree to disagree and not have to insult and alienate for it. Sald,y there are certain people on this forum whom I have issues with and I allow myself to fall into that trap.

Whenever I'm now asked about whether I would havhe support the invasion had I known what would have happened with the benefit of hindsight my response is had I known the way we would have fought the war up until the indurgency of a few months ago then no I would not have supported the invasion. But the reasoning for the invasion (WMD's included), I did support.

Thanks Steve...I mean clearly we are not going to achieve what we thought we were going to back in 2003, but if we can settle the dust and get out of there (sooner than later) with something - an Iraq that can police itself and not allow terrorists a safe haven - then we can at least say it's not all a lost...probably didn't get what we paid for, but we can deal with that.

__________________
The Lone Ranger of the AWE liberal elitists.....who was that masked man???
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


And now, I'm the Elitist of liberal Elitists...