Tall Dave writes: “There’s a lot of carping that the admin is now lowering expectations, but I think it’s really the expectations of critics that have been raised. Imagine if you had told someone in Jan 2003 the following:
“’By August 2005, not only will the regime have been removed from power and its leaders be on trial, but Iraq will have held successful elections and be on the verge of approving a new constitution. Fewer than 2,000 American soldiers will have been killed by hostile fire, and resistance will be light, scattered and very unpopular among Iraqis.‘
“You’d have been called delusionally optimistic. Now that situation is cause for despair.”
The good news for Iraqis is that Bush will be in office for 3 more years, and he’s not going to give an inch even if his approval rating drops to single digits. By then the Iraqis should have the situation pretty well under control, or at least as under control as it’s ever going to get.
[…] At this point, it’s unlikely we can “lose†in the sense of the elected gov’t being overthrown by Baathists or Zarqawi’s loons. People forget the insurgency, while extremely vicious and quite capable of grabbing headlines, is actually very weak militarily. They aren’t remotely a match heads-up even for the 170,000 half-assed troops now being fielded by the democratic Iraqi gov’t. Setting off roadside bombs and running away from every fight is not exactly a show of strength in the contest over who rules Iraq. The insurgents can’t take or hold an inch of ground; Fallujah was the last place they even tried. And the democratic gov’t gets stronger every day. In two years, the Iraqi troops will number 250,000+ and be much better trained and equipped. The gov’t also has $2.5 billion a month in oil income on its side. The insurgency has only what the Baathists have stashed and Al Qaeda can raise, and munitions in Iraq are getting more expensive, as are the not-very-committed mercenary thugs that carry out most of the attacks.
The problem is not that administration goals are being downgraded, it’s that people outside the administration are now setting a totally unrealistic goal of a violence-free Iraq as a condition for declaring victory. Ain’t gonna happen, at least not anytime soon. Free and democratic, yes, maybe; as peaceful as Vermont, no.
Read the whole thing.
Dave’s analysis repeats the assertion made by Austin Bay and others familiar with the situation on the ground in Iraq that the “failure” or “quagmire” we fear—the one driving Presidential approval ratings down and causing so much handwringing (and, in some quarters, even a mild schadenfreude) among opponents of Operation Iraqi Freedom—is largely a mirage, the product of an insurgency using an international and domestic media driven by sensationalism and fiery visuals to create the appearance of unrelenting carnage and an insurgency that is growing in strength, which is not the case.
Ironically, many progressive / liberal media analysts (and propagandists like Michael Moore, in Bowling for Columbine) seemed familiar with the phenomenon of iconic overdetermination driving public perception and opinion—and were willing to point it out loudly and with a sense of critical triumphalism—when the object of their analysis was, say, crime (particularly Black crime); now, however, perception is once again reality, and the most consistent nodal points we’re presented, in the unfurling of the Iraqi narrative as it is being presented, are casualty reports and insurgent violence. Which is why I’m not so sanguine as some other commenters that the mainstream media’s coverage is not quite intentionally misleading—though its motives seem to be driven equally by the ratings boost that comes with sensationalism, and by its desire (conscious or not) to fit the events in Iraq into a preconceived narrative frame.
Who I do find fault with are those who study media and communications who’ve become so politicized that they are willing to surrender their objectivity and critical sensibilities for the furtherance of their ideological beliefs. It’s one thing, after all, for a ratings-hungry visual medium like TV news to push the sensational over the mundane; it’s another thing, however, for those who are supposed to point out such things and explain their editorial influences on pubic perception to remain silent (in the best cases), or (in the worst cases) to become complicit in the percerptual subterfuge by pretending that the televised and print version of the Iraq War is somehow in line with realities on the ground.
Thankfully, people like Arthur Chrenkoff and Michael Yon have provided some balance—but the sad truth is, the mainstream media, for all it’s been weakened by having been caught on several occasions massaging the truth, either as a means of advocacy or to fit a particular pre-determined narrative bent, is still the main information pipeline in this country, and so is still largely in control of the discourse.
****
update: Been meaning to point you to this Pundit Review Radio interview with Michael Yon. Now I have.
for those who are supposed to point out such things and explain their editorial influences on pubic perception to remain silent
Could you say more about this “pubic perception”? Can I participate? I’m always up for more perceiving of the pubic! What a great pubic service our press is providing for us!
Comments from a Mosul Bunker should be required reading every day. As the spam word says “remember” like just where is our bunker anyhow Mohhamed?
By some standards, South Africa is far worse off now than it was fifteen years ago.
NationMaster
I share your pessimism. We are facing a media that has gotten addicted to power. Prior to the Kennedy adminsitration, it wielded influence, but after Vietnam and Watergate, it tasted real power, and it will fight visciously to keep it.
We are also faced with a media dominated by people who objectively believe that American power is evil, and therefor that any Amercian success is a setback on the way to a better world.
This is not good. When these folks have any plan to deal with evil at all, it is usually to have a nice chat. Mostly they don’t think evil exists, so they try to character-assasinate anyone who attempts to lead against it.
What is to be done? Are tyrannies the only forms of government that can defend themselves.
At first I read ”Tall Dave” as ”Ted Rall” and after the first two columns was hopelessly confused
paragraphs, that is, not columns
Nice synopsis of what has become the biggest problem facing the military.
This whole thing is a big deal for a lot of people (my age especially, IMO) who were raised on a mix of WWII stories from the grandparents and Vietnam stories from the uncles and aunts. We want to believe in the good that our military force is capable of doing, but we also know the foibles and less than honorable moments of the past. The dangerous thing is, our knowledge of both of these possibile outcomes makes us susceptible, in a very bitter angry way, to the perception-bending that the media is so good at.
If this national assembly does not have the mindset required to produce a meaningful Iraqi constitution, then it is best to dissolve and re-elect the assembly than settle for a prop. It is more important to get it right, than to get it “right now.â€Â
As Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari noted, “We should not be hasty regarding the issues and the constitution should not be born crippled.†The constitution must be meaningful – a living, breathing document that can be a foundation for the long road towards a real democracy in a united Iraq.
At first I read “Tall Dave†as “Ted Rallâ€Â
I have never been more insulted in my life.
If there was any justice in journalism, Yon would not only get a Pulitzer, they’d name the thing after him.
apropos Turing: freedom
At first I read “Tall Dave†as “Ted Rallâ€Â
I have never been more insulted in my life.
You’re young yet. Give it time.
yeah, sorry about that
Dude…are you fucking high, or what?
”Successful elections?” Where over half of the population could not vote and the only ones on the ballot were Unocal puppets?
“On the verge of approving a new constitution?” Apparently you haven’t seen the neswpaper today…
“Resistance will be light?” Where would this be? Because here in the real world, the violence is only escalating…
Go away, Don. The Ted Rall, black helicopter UNOCAL shit gets ignored here. Besides, treating people with such contempt every time you open your mouth makes it unlikely anyone is going to engage you, and I have better things to do than host a partisan pissing contest.
Yeah! He’s running a non-partisan, thoroughly ecumenical pissing contest, dude!
So piss off!
(or was that too contemtuous?)
Momo Giancana says no…
SB: past
Don, may I suggest using the Travelocity website to see if you can get a flight to Earth?
A Constitution. Is NOT a living Breathing document. It Cannaot be. Think about it you Fool. Jeezel Peezel. Idiot.
Over half could not vote? In what world? And get your Moonbat conspiracies straight; the UNOCAL thing is Afghanistan, Iraq’s corporate hobgoblin is Halliburton.
Light, heavy, why do you think it matters? Iraq is a roach motel. The terrorists check in, but they don’t check out.
John, despite your strange punctuation, bad spelling and name calling – you forgot to make an argument.
Jeff, seriously, you’re posting these comments yourself, right? I mean, this sort of post can’t be real, can it? WTF is “Jeezel Peezel” supposed to mean? It sounds vaguely pornographic.
TW: services, as in: Simulated Moonbat, just one of the many services Protein Wisdom provides.
(Don is just funning with us, right? I mean, his comments are satirizing the moobat contingent, right? Right? Please?)
Afraid not. That’s just Don in all his Don-ness.