Is this article an example of liberal media bias?

[Xiahou]

We are on the defensive, because we never stabilized the country. There aren't any liberals responsible for that failure. Passing the buck isn't going to work.

Worse than that, the fiasco has tied our hands with respect to Iran and North Korea and diverted our attention from Afghanistan, etc.

If you want to look for traitors, find those who mislead our country into backing action on false information. Those are your traitors.

Dissent is not treason. If you don't agree with that, go live in Cuba.

Dissent is well and fine. But, when it consists of nothing but a litany of complaints with no constructive ideas I think it does give a certain level of comfort to our enemies. It shows we are divided and don't support the goals of the military and could give hope that we'll pull out.

There is a difference between saying 'The administration is mismanaging this war, instead of xyz we should be doing abc.' vs 'The administration is mismanaging this war, their bungling is losing the war.'

I'm not going to try to say that an American doesnt have the right to say whatever they want- but some statements can undercut the war effort.

[Red Harvest]

Dissent is well and fine. But, when it consists of nothing but a litany of complaints with no constructive ideas I think it does give a certain level of comfort to our enemies. It shows we are divided and don't support the goals of the military and could give hope that we'll pull out.

There is a difference between saying 'The administration is mismanaging this war, instead of xyz we should be doing abc.' vs 'The administration is mismanaging this war, their bungling is losing the war.'

I'm not going to try to say that an American doesnt have the right to say whatever they want- but some statements can undercut the war effort.

I agree.

There were folks offering just that sort of criticism, and they were rebuffed.

So what do we do now? Beats me. The big mistakes were made early on, and many of them can't be compensated for now.

[Devastatin Dave]

So what do we do now? Beats me.

LOL, so you are just going to disagree and not give an alternative!!! You just proved his point and the point I've made. Its all snipe, snipe, snipe, but ZERO alternatives. God, do you even read what you write!?!?! You sound like John Kerry, "I have a plan". Mr Kerry, what is your plan, "Well, uhh, I would just do things differently, did I mentioned that I served in Viet Nam?". LOL!!!

[Seamus Fermanagh]

DevDave:

In general, I agree with you that those who complain without presenting a viable alternative aren't adding to the discussion. I'd give Red H a bit of room though, since his posts strike me as more of the "I wish it hadn't been malfed, why doesn't anybody do something" variety more so than the Phil Donahue "Bush did it to make his friends rich, we have to cut and run now like a whipped dog" drivel we hear all to often.

I too am frustrated that the time/resources going into the stablization of Iraq make it harder for us to wax the next terror-haven/rogue state in line. Backing off Iran or NK, or taking Syria apart like the dime watch it is would please me more. However, since Iraq is broke and must be fixed if we're gonna have a long-term win, we simply have to finish the job well.

I do suspect that we need a lot more boots than we have though. The finest army in the world can't use multi-million dollar force multipliers to identify 5 badguys up in the third room on the left, back hallway, flush them out and take them down. That's a job, and a long slow tough one, for the dog-faces. I think our gals and guys are doing it and doing it well -- but they're not in a position to do that and something else, and I wish the DoD had been more honest with itself about that from the get go.

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

GC: I agree in principle with what you are saying.

Unfortunately, I have no idea how we would get to the point where Seamus' interview could take place.

If it were implemented overnight, American politics would combust, setting in motion a chain of events that would destroy the sun.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

GC:

In principle, it is likely that all of us would agree with you, not just Atpg. I certainly don't enshrine mendacity as the apex of social interaction.

In practice, political leaders have been leaving out details, glossing over unpleasant facts and employing misdirection since at least the time of the Roman Republic -- and probably well before. I do not think our current era to be any worse and, I admit with a touch of sadness, not any better either.

Yet it is demonstable that some of the lies and mis-direction were perpetrated IN the public interest and not at the expense thereof. So where and how do you draw the line in order to serve the greatest good?

Absolute truth at all times and in all situations may not always be to the good.

Thoughts?

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I disagree with you. I think unabated truth should be demanded of politicians by the people who put their livelyhood on the line by voting them into office.

Compadre, you are, at the very least, consistent. I don't think we'll collectively head in the direction you suggest, but if 4 decades have taught me anything, it is that I do NOT know all that much. We shall see.

[Red Harvest]

LOL, so you are just going to disagree and not give an alternative!!! You just proved his point and the point I've made. Its all snipe, snipe, snipe, but ZERO alternatives. God, do you even read what you write!?!?! You sound like John Kerry, "I have a plan". Mr Kerry, what is your plan, "Well, uhh, I would just do things differently, did I mentioned that I served in Viet Nam?". LOL!!!

And he could not have done ANY worse than Bush, nor could Gore.

I don't have any easy solution. It isn't my fault that they guy you elected screwed this up so badly. Have you got a solution? Put it forward. Replacing those in charge in '04 was my best hope of finding an answer. I upheld my end, while you got suckered.

You can't really have a solution until you analyze the problem and figure out how you got here. (Hint: it wasn't liberals that made this mess.) So I've been focusing on how we got to this point. "Mission Accomplished", "Bring 'em on!" and other assinine amateurish approaches got us where we are to day. Poor planning and delusional thinking got us here.

The situation in Iraq is not helping us in our aims as a nation, nor is it going to without some unforseen changes. It isn't up to us anymore. It is up to the Iraqi's.

Left with few options, my solution: Give the Iraqi's about a year to pull themselves together and get control of their country--make it clear today that we are not staying indefinitely to prop them up because they can't agree with one another. Ultimately it is about them, let them know they have to do this. If they don't want to have a unified country and want to have a civil war, we can't force unification on them. If they can't do it with our help in a year, then they aren't going to, so pull out and be done with it. If they start getting a handle on it and progress is clear, then remain as needed/requested in declining amounts for a few years.

Enforcing things as a long term occupier, with no real Iraqi govt. wont' work. It is folly.