Metatstatizing Iran impressions
Leaving aside the very important point of this story, look at the deceptive way this is constructed (first paragraph, front page, WaPo.)
Doesn't this seem to imply a far greater role for Iranian made EFP's than there really has been? Thus far, according to yesterday's briefing, 170 US soldiers have been killed by these Iranian EFP's.
Thumbnailing thate 70% number, 2,000 US soldiers have been killed by non-Iranian IED's, and yet this article leaves a very different impression.
This stuff is far more dangerous when it's written into the context of an article than when it's presented into a briefing. It adopts a "truth of consensus" which separates it from the intellectual questioning of a briefing.
The Army is working to fill a shortfall in Iraq of thousands of advanced Humvee armor kits designed to reduce U.S. troop deaths from roadside bombs -- including a rising threat from particularly lethal weapons linked to Iran and known as "explosively formed penetrators" (EFP) -- that are now inflicting 70 percent of the American casualties in the country, according to U.S. military and civilian officials.
Doesn't this seem to imply a far greater role for Iranian made EFP's than there really has been? Thus far, according to yesterday's briefing, 170 US soldiers have been killed by these Iranian EFP's.
Thumbnailing thate 70% number, 2,000 US soldiers have been killed by non-Iranian IED's, and yet this article leaves a very different impression.
This stuff is far more dangerous when it's written into the context of an article than when it's presented into a briefing. It adopts a "truth of consensus" which separates it from the intellectual questioning of a briefing.
posted by mikevotes at
8:39 AM
7 Comments:
This is shockingly bad reporting. Bordering on irresponsible. It does two things; it implies the need for armored Humvees is the fault of explosions, not criminally bad admin/military policy, and it further implies -- nearly states as fact -- that if not for the Iranian government, US casualties would be down by 70%.
The free press, the last bastion of truth when a government's gone bad, is now part of the problem. Bush will get his Armageddon, and my children and grandchildren will live in a worse world for it.
By
-epm, at 11:06 AM
I didn't catch that first point, but you're right.
The need for armor definitely leaves out the broader reason they've been playing catchup for so long.
"You go to war with the army you have..." and all that.
Mike
By
mikevotes, at 11:50 AM
A BBC online article expands on one of your points. The US is making a miopic fit about 170 death, out of 3,000+. Knowing that Americans lack sophistication, and conflate Shia and Sunni into a single bucket called Muslim, and making such a big show of accusing the Iranian government of arming "terrorists," the US hopes to leave the solid impression -- while never actually saying so -- that Iran is by and far the reason for American blood running through Iraqi sands. This is classic BushCo doublespeak: to say something without actually saying the words.
The article distills the "evidence" to a single point: the newer IEDs bear a technological resemblance to those used by Hezzbolla, who we all "know" is supplied by Iran so obviously the government of Iran is killing Americans. There is NO evidence, only inference! It avoids another equally likely observation: Iraqi's aren't idiots and are independently self-capable of improving the effectiveness of their implements of death.
But on the broader issue of Iran influencing and or supporting certain Shia insurgent groups... Well no shit! What did you expect!? Fricken sophomoric morons. Certainly we have to expect some amount of influence coming from ALL of Iraq's neighbors. Hell, look at all the "influence" we've peddled in sovereign Latin American countries...
Let's all get together and get ExxonMobil an oil exploration contract with Iran. That'll stop the BushCo war-talk in a heartbeat. Hell, Ahmajinedad (sp) will suddenly become Bush new bestest friend.
By
-epm, at 12:31 PM
Interesting point raised in a DailyKos diary:
And by the way--those pictures of mortar rounds and such you're seeing on television? They're out of an Army Field Manual. No cameras were allowed at the "briefing"
By
-epm, at 1:13 PM
I caught the no cameras and video recorders allowed. (No possible independent analysis.)
Frankly, I don't doubt the possibility/probability of Iranian arms beng supplied and used by the militias. (Private Saudis are shipping money and arranging arms for the Sunnis which bear markings from all over the world.)
My doubts are to the culpability of the Iranian government. This stuff could be stolen or sent by lower level officials. It could be brokers buying it on the black market or from Hezbullah. It could be profiteers. It could be a rogue operation within the intelligence. It could be willfull ignorance, or it could be an Iranian government operation.
The proof thus far supplied does not match the allegations being made.
Mike
By
mikevotes, at 1:44 PM
I completely agree with what you're saying here. My point about the stock images was that they could give the false impression of certainty that images of charred fragments would not show. I worry that the great unwashed (ie people like me) would see the stock images and say, "Wow, look at the detail in the photo! Surely the product of a nation-state."
By
-epm, at 3:25 PM
As a parallel example, in the "Pictures of the Day" unused folder, I have a number of satellite shots of both Iraq and Iran claiming to show this and that.
When the release of the information is completely controlled, there's no way you can ever completely trust what you are given. It's too easy to cheat.
Especially with this administration's track record.
Mike
By
mikevotes, at 4:09 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home