Posted by
William Sandry on Monday, May 28, 2007 12:53:31 PM
The New York Times reported that the President was considering a reduction in the number of troops in Iraq in 2008. The Times cast this possible future reduction of troops in Iraq as a capitulation to Democrat Party Pressure by the President. Virtually every Sunday talk show and the papers that reprinted the Times article followed the Times lead assumption. At best this assumption was a guess and an opinion. It is an opinion based on a rumor. What kind of journalistic integrity is this?
The President is the one person that has held firm in his belief in fighting the Terrorist War on Humanity, regardless of election pressures, for 6 years. The Times now implies he is giving in when he does not have any future elections to worry about!
While the political pressure is significant it is equally plausible that our new antiterrorist military strategy in Iraq is beginning to show signs of success. The recent conversion of tribal leaders in the Anbar Province is a good example of success. Rather than give our troops and military any credit for doing a good job and hopefully enabling a political solution, these reporters and political pundits depict the efforts of our troops as a loosing misguided effort that the USA can’t win. They consider the only possible consideration for a reduction in troops is the failure of our military and troops. It wasn’t even mentioned that planning for a future reduction could be because our military is succeeding and a political resolution is on the horizon. Of course this possibility might lend support to those that have been supporting the fight against the 30 year old Terrorist War on Humanity. The Times coverage on Iraq has made it clear it would not want to print such a positive article.
God forbid if the NY Times were to genuinely speak positively about our service personnel or say anything that would encourage public confidence in the USA.