Interesting post by the reporter who wants to keep his job as an embeded reporter. Now lets review a few things. I think that we as Americans need to review the terms that we are using. First we won the war. We won it four years ago. However our performance as an occupational force has much to be desired.

It has taken me awhile to realize this but this is not a war, but an occupation. One can never "win" an occupation. Occuptions are about submitting the conquered to the rules and policies of the conquered, while returning the populace to a state of normalacy. We may be seeing a decrease to violence, but how much of that can be directly linked to the "surge," and how much of that can be linked to the persistent patience of those who live in Iraq.

Posted by psyberwolfe at September 15, 2007 03:06 PM

First, you obviously don't know about volunteer journalists like Bill Roggio and Michael Yon and Michael Totten. They are not employed as journalists but are bloggers who are being supported in their reporting by donations from the public. Thus, there is no "job" to lose and they are doing what they do out of concern that the MSM is not doing a good job of reporting from the ground where the troops are.

Secondly, the removal of the Baathist government of Saddam Hussein was only part of the "war" against islamofascism. The attacks in England, Spain, France, Italy and thwarted attacks in those countries including Germany, Denmark, the Netherlands etc. ought to give you a clue (but apparantly doesn't) that this is not a war against a country but a war against an idea - islamofascism. There is a "Gathering Storm" to borrow a phrase from Winston Churchill and most of the left doesn't get it.

We are fighting in Iraq to support a democratically elected government, to beat back Al Qaeda in Iraq which kills - murders Iraqi civilians in classical terrorist tactics to eliminate the government and US from the middle east. The nascent government in Iraq is a real threat to the Iranians, Syrians, Saudis and even the Pakistanis because if democracy and rule by vote ever takes hold in the middle east, the rule by kings, imams etc is done.

Lastly, you obviously wouldn't know an Occupational Government if you saw one. Following World War II, we occupied Germany, Italy and Japan. Their initial governments were totally under our supervision (and that of the Russians, French and English in various "Zones" of occupation) and stayed that way for many years. In Iraq, the government (as disorganized as it is) is totally the choice of the Iraqi people as exemplified by a number of free and unfettered elections. I also might point out that - to borrow your sentences - "We may be seeing a decrease to violence, but how much of that can be directly linked to the "surge," and how much of that can be linked to the persistent patience of those who live in Iraq." is exactly what the counterinsurgency ideas of General Petraeus predicted. That with our help, and guidance, the Iraqi tribal leaders would rise up and take out the AQ fighters that held them in thrall. What you are seeing is not incidental to US involvement, but as a result of.

So, psyberwolfe, get with the program, learn about what is going on before commenting

Posted by GM Roper at September 16, 2007 06:02 AM

I am with the program are you? The government in Iraq is no more legitimate than the governments of the Warsaw pact ever were. There can never be a legitimate government in Iraq until there is no longer a foreign army within their borders. If they were actually legitimate then why are we and not UN peacekeeping troops helping the beseiged government of Iraq solve their problems.

Next lets talk about this inane idea that we can declare war on a tactic. You can declare wars against things, not ideas nor tactics. If this was truly a war on Terrorism then why haven't we chased down the IRA, or the Spanish seperatist, or the anti government forces in Japan, or the remaining Branch Davidians? I'll spell that out for you: these known terrorists haven't used terrorist tactics recently. You see the point of declaring war against an ideal or tactic is so that one may have unending war.

Those bloggers would loose their "embeddedness" the moment that they started reporting anything other than what the Pentagon and Bushco would have them say. So I don't believe a single word they are saying because MSM embeds say the same crap they do. Watch the Military channel if you don't believe me.

While a month ago a group of soldiers sent in a letter to the NY Times about the war as they have seen it. A very telling piece about how this surge is "working." But of course you will have hundreds of counter arguments... so argue away.

Posted by psyberwolfe at September 16, 2007 08:09 PM