Murtha’s comments on ’surge’ are a problem for House Democrats - The Crypt’s Blog - Politico.com
Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.), one of the leading anti-war voices in the House Democratic Caucus, is back from a trip to Iraq and he now says the “surge is working.” This could be a huge problem for Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and other Democratic leaders, who are blocking approval of the full $200 billion being sought by President Bush for combat operations in Iraq in 2008.
Murtha’s latest comments are also a stark reversal from what he said earlier in the year. The Pennsylvania Democrat, who chairs the powerful Defense subcommittee on the House Appropriations Committee, has previously stated that the surge “is not working” and the United States faced a military disaster in Iraq.
The way this article is structured is a masterly example of how good propaganda is created.
We get the lede, in which three words from Murtha - “surge is working” - are quoted. What follows this are several paragraphs and several hundred words demonstrating how just a few months ago, Murtha was saying the surge wasn’t working. The effect is to advance the notion (by the relative weight of the treatment of both positions) that Murtha’s change is inexplicable, not based on his own observations in Iraq, and probably in some way corrupt. The dead giveaway of the attempted slant comes near the end of the piece:
To be fair, Murtha has pointed out that there has been a lack of poltical progress within Iraq to bring about permanent reconciliation between competing Sunni, Shiite and Kurdish factions,
“To be fair” is an odd usage. It implies that Murtha’s change of heart - which supports the Bush Administration - is slur-worthy, but “to be fair,” (ie., to point out where he is doing something good as a balance - at least from this writer’s point of view) he’s also said something unsupportive of Bush’s strategies.
Submit to Stumbled Upon!
Improved security is a statistic based on the number of sectarian murders and killings - among other things.
If the sheer number of ‘potential’ victims is lower, it stands to reason the number of ‘actual’ victims will also be lower. This lowered casualty figure, in some small way, can be attributed to the surge, but more than likely it is based more on my initial points (exodus and ethnic cleansing).
And still, since the surge was supposed to provide ‘breathing room’ for the politicians, we still have to consider the dubious success based on this important benchmark.
If the surge doesn’t do what it was put in place to do: breathing room for political discussions and compromises, then one cannot call the surge a success no matter how low the killing statistic is.
The right side talking points generally try to elevate the success and downplay the failure, and I see that happening in this instance. If the surge does not improve the political reconciliation (it’s intended goal), then it is a failure.
Lest I be accused of indulging in unwarranted excoriation, let me make sure I understand exactly what you are saying here. Is it your contention that the death toll in Iraq is falling because we have slaughtered so many Iraqis there just aren’t that many left for us to kill, and therefore the number of deaths is lessened?
Bill, it’s a combination of that and the contention that a lot of the Sunnis have fled to other countries such as Jordan. Which was true a few months ago, but is now reversing itself (as documented by Michael Yon and others) as a result of the improving security situation because of the surge.
tom needs to read a little history and take some meds for his BDS.
Actually - no. Security, in the context of present-day Iraq, is a quantifiable state of existence. Improved security, in that same context, is definable as a lowered level of violence observed over a period of time compared with a prior, similar-in-length period. Statistical comparisons can be helpful in defining that improvement, but are not a requirement (unless you’re a devoted bean-counter, or, in this context, a Democrat).
Wow…I’d bet that it really pained your beady little eyes to have to actually write that, didn’t it? Thanks a whole bunch…for very damn little.
If, by some odd chance, you actually have something with which to back this up, please state it…otherwise, we’ll figure that you must’ve pulled it out of that famous/notorious outer body of the Solar System - and proceed to give it the attention it deserves, by cordially ignoring it.
Third strike, and out - you’re just full of these little unwarranted, unsupported and unsupportable bon mots, aren’t you?
Back to the crawlspace, Tommy - and be sure to wipe the drool off Mommy’s keyboard before you tell her you’re all through playing for the day.