A question of semantics

Vice President Cheney voiced his opinion that the Iraqi insurgency was in its “last throes” – the media, always eager to provide the worst possible view of the world in bite-sized chunks to a nation of “reality TV” and Jerry Springer junkies, has done its best to make that statement out to be foolhardy.

Yes, “last throes” may be an optimistic way of putting it. Then again, when faced with certain defeat, is it not common – even expected – to pull out all the stops in an effort to regain a little ground? If the insurgency was about to fall apart in the face of the superior forces of the Allies and the new Iraqi police/military, wouldn’t they do everything in their power to hang on to whatever foothold they might have?

Perhaps Mr. Cheney should have added that while the insurgency was indeed in its “last throes”, that we should expect increased violence as the insurgents grew more and more desperate. By all accounts, the rabid dogs of radical Islam are being taken out at a http://www.google.com/custom?domains=jonathanmurray.com&q=insurgents+dead&sa=Search&sitesearch=&client=pub-6616424773924529&forid=1&ie=ISO-8859-1&oe=ISO-8859-1&cof=GALT%3A%23CC0000%3BGL%3A1%3BDIV%3A%23808080%3BVLC%3AFFFFFF%3BAH%3Acenter%3BBGC%3A111111%3BLBGC%3A000000%3BALC%3ACC0000%3BLC%3ACC0000%3BT%3AEEEEEE%3BGFNT%3AAAAAAA%3BGIMP%3AAAAAAA%3BLH%3A50%3BLW%3A500%3BL%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fjonathanmurray.com%2Flogos%2Fbglogo-black.jpg%3BS%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fjonathanmurray.com%3BFORID%3A1%3B&hl=en much higher rate than any allied forces. Granted, any allied casualties are regrettable, and we mourn our losses just as we mourn our losses from training accidents, car wrecks, disease, and any other situation or conflict where our people are put in harms way.

The bottom line is this: The right thing is being done in Iraq – whether or not you think the justification for doing it was laid out badly, it is still the right thing. The media needs to quit trying to press officials into making defeatist statements and start asking questions like, “What more do we need to do to make this work? (and how can we (the media) help?”, “How can we best tell the world that we’re in this for the win?”, and “What message would you like to give to our supposed allies in the middle East who continue to support those who would stand against us?”

Sorry… I wandered off into that mythical land where the media was actually interested in supporting their country, and not simply looking for ways to improve their bottom line. Meh.


  1. That’s an interesting perspective, Red. Thanks for your comment.

    In rebuttal, I’d offer that the United States has always maintained the right to pre-emptively strike when it is in the interest of our national security. Any country that defies international law, harbors terrorists or the organizations that support them, or threatens their neighbors and regional security is an inherent threat to this country, and I daresay to the entire world.

    Saddam Hussein’s Iraq was guilty of all of those, not to mention the genocide of thousands (millions) of their own people.

    The repurcussions of taking action cannot begin to compare to those of ignoring the problem and hoping it would go away. You may think sitting on the sidelines while the world moves on is the ideal place to be, fortunately not everyone is so blind.

    PS. Australia is well represented among the forces working to build an Iraq for the people. It’s reassuring to know that short-sighted folks like yourself are not fully representative of that country.

  2. It certainly does show that the media has done injustice to the American people. They need to sell paper, air – whatever, and will do so at the expense of real reporting infavor of sensationalising.
    You are right, in that they don’t seem to want to help – just add fuel to the fire.

Comments are closed.