Who Can Really Say?

Ahead of the Curve

Like a broken record, for months we were told how terribly things were going in Iraq, the Sadr revolt being Exhibit A or B, take your pick. But today the NY Times explains that we won a big victory against Sadr and his Mahdi Army.

It's nice to see the Times reject what I call Vietnamization journalism (all US military engagements are a repeat of Vietnam), even if they are a day late and a dollar short in doing so. The question remains, why are so many journalists so blind to our successes until after the fact? Why, in the heat of battle, are we the clumsy fool, bound to lose, even as decisive victory is at hand? Among the many many reasons is that they have so little understanding and regard for things military. And yes, I know, I'm being kind.

Similarly, The Belmont Club takes a look at the WaPo's somewhat less sanguine analysis of the Sadr revolt. And for an even better understanding of why we're succeeding where others have failed, try Belmont Club's next entry, The Grand Bumblers.

Really -- read it. You won't see stuff like this in the Times or the WaPo for a few months yet.

Posted by Peter at June 26, 2004 09:53 AM