Partially declassified prechewed NIE bits - Now with Retsin.
Here's a PDF link to the NYTimes host. It's a partial declassification.
The early lead seems to be Iraq is the "cause celebre" for terrorists. The question being posed now is "How much has the Iraq war helped the terrorists?"
I stand by what I said earlier today, that this NIE leak/partial declassification shifts the entire election narrative.
(Later: Also, notice the subtle way that this story line separates the Iraq war from the "war on terror." True or not, this runs directly against the administration's summer/fall effort to retie Iraq to the "war on terror.")
Wednesday: Very odd. The wire reports have gone totally neutral, largely painting this as a political conflict and moving it down off the top story. The major papers, NYTimes, WaPo, LATimes, and USAToday all paint this "Iraq war causes terror." I don't know what's going on. My theory may well be wrong.
The early lead seems to be Iraq is the "cause celebre" for terrorists. The question being posed now is "How much has the Iraq war helped the terrorists?"
I stand by what I said earlier today, that this NIE leak/partial declassification shifts the entire election narrative.
(Later: Also, notice the subtle way that this story line separates the Iraq war from the "war on terror." True or not, this runs directly against the administration's summer/fall effort to retie Iraq to the "war on terror.")
Wednesday: Very odd. The wire reports have gone totally neutral, largely painting this as a political conflict and moving it down off the top story. The major papers, NYTimes, WaPo, LATimes, and USAToday all paint this "Iraq war causes terror." I don't know what's going on. My theory may well be wrong.
posted by mikevotes at
5:09 PM
2 Comments:
How can Bush be seen as anything other than a liar about the conclusions of the NIE report? What is it going to take for this man to lose his credibility with the American people? The MSNBC headline says: "IRAQ war inspiring terror: U.S. failure would inspire more:" I am concerned that this second point will be latched on as a reason to stay in IRAQ, even if the report doesn't intend this interpretation.
By
Ptelea, at 6:48 PM
Within that, there is an assumption that Iraq is in fact winnable, whatever that means.
If Iraq is not winnable, staying is the absolutely wrong thing to do.
How you determine that, I don't know, but the current course does not project "victory," it projects either an Iraq cracked into three pieces, sucking in other countries for a regional civil war, or a paper thin democratic shell covering long term fractures which will burst out in violence.
I think your fear of that line being accepted is justified, that same underlying assumption has been accepted throughout the last year as Bush uttered "stay the course."
The only counter I would have is that quite clearly the public is tired of the current course, and that would undermine that effort.
The administration has been pushing this "going forward" version of the Iraq argument for awhile, that no matter what was done in the past, we must look forward, and it hasn't resulted in any real shift in public opinion.
Mike
By
mikevotes, at 7:29 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home