|
|
|---|
|
American Politics Journal Atrios Barry Crimmins Betty Bowers Buzzflash Consortium News Daily Howler Daily Kos Democatic Underground Disinfotainment Today Evil GOP Bastards Faux News Channel Greg Palast The Hollywood Liberal Internet Weekly Jesus General Joe Conason Josh Marshall Liberal Oasis Make Them Accountable Mark Morford Mike Malloy Political Humor - About.com Political Wire Randi Rhodes Rude Pundit Smirking Chimp Take Back the Media Whitehouse.org More Links |
Subject: Michael Ware
Hi there, Bart! I want to make a comment
about Michael Ware.
It seems that he doesn't make stuff up, and that's
commendable.
I love how he revealed the "straight talking"
McCain as the nut that he is."
But check out this cnn transcript; he apparently
buys into some of the Bush and Co. bullsnap-
Malveaux: And as we look at what impact this
war funds battle might have on the troops,
what effect might it have on the efforts to
calm Iraq's cauldron of violence?
Moments ago, I spoke with CNN's Michael Ware
in Baghdad.
He's covered this war since the very beginning.
Thanks for joining us, Michael.
Now, obviously Congress, as well as the administration,
they're at loggerheads over
whether or not the troops should withdraw,
whether or not they should withdraw funds, as well.
And we've heard from Cheney and Bush, saying
this emboldens the insurgents.
Do they pay any attention to this at all?
Is that even true?
MICHAEL WARE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, if,
by some bizarre political miracle, Congress
was able to impose a real time line, a real
deadline on the U.S. presence here or on funding for the war,
that absolutely would play into the hands
of al Qaeda in Iran. That would be handing the entire advantage
to them. That's why that can never really
happen.
But in terms of the broader debate, in terms
of taking the temperature of the American public, adhering to
what's going on in Congress, looking at the
Congressional elections, absolutely do the insurgents,
do al Qaeda and does Iran and its proxy organizations
in Iraq pay attention?
Yes, for sure. I mean they know that the most
certain way to strike at their enemy is to strike at his support
back home. And, indeed, they monitor these
things. They know that, you know, what's happening in D.C.
doesn't really relate to the ground. This
is just political artifice.
Nonetheless, it does tell them about the pressure
points to apply. And we saw from 2003 the Baathist
insurgents saying from the beginning this
war will not be won on the battlefield, it will be won on that
-- pointing to a TV screen. That's where this
war will be won -- Suzanne.
MALVEAUX: Do you think the president, as well
as the vice president, then, are actually accurate
when they say all of this infighting is weakening
our position overseas, specifically in Baghdad?
WARE: Oh, absolutely. I mean it's very clear
-- it's been evident since the mid-term elections that America
is in a period of strategic malaise. Essentially,
America does not have one rock solid strategy. There's no one
clear way forward to U.S. victory.
There is a lot of infighting. There's a lot of debate. Now in a pluralist
democracy, that's seen as a healthy thing.
But when you're fighting a war, you want a clear and concise direction.
You want everyone on the same page and you
want your enemy to know that you shalt not falter.
Now, that's precisely the opposite message
that America is sending to its opponents here in the region.
And, quite frankly, that's why America's rivals
in the Middle East are becoming so much stronger and
the concept of American empire or American
presence is becoming so much weaker.
MALVEAUX: Thank you very much, Michael Ware, from Baghdad.
He also said during an interview with Malveaux
that the dustup over the Iraq war supplemental would be
perceived by the "kids" who are fighting as a
"kick in the gut." Not sure what I think about him, frankly.
But I thought you would find this interesting.
Take care.
Ann B.
The war has already been lost, no matter how many lies are told by Bush,
Cheney and McCain.
The American people know that. The people aren't behind Bush
like they were in 2003, so yes,
our military and political position is weaker than it was back then.
Recognizing the facts is never a bad thing.
Discuss
it on The Bartcop Forum
Discuss it on the BartBlog