Sunday, May 11, 2008

So let me get this straight ... 
According to a story in the NY Times today,

1. Iran pulls the rug out from under the Sadrists by throwing its support behind the Iraqi government and Maliki.

2. The government gains control of Sadr City

3. All of Sadr's fighters are still subject to arrest

4. The Sadr militia has lost the popular support of Sadr City residents.

5. The political establishment has turned against the Sadrists.

6. The government maintained a stranglehold on resupply for the Sadrists.

7. The Sadrists are outgunned and outclassed, militarily.

8. The militia has ordered their gunmen to "disappear from the streets"

9. Under the terms of the deal, the government is allowed to search Sadr City for weapons

10. The Iraqi Army gains invaluable operational experience, taking the lead in the operation against the Sadrists in Sadr City

...And yet according to reporter Alissa Rubin, "it's not clear who won."

Seriously, Alissa. Does that look like a draw to you? Or did you just wake up and heat up a can of dumbass for breakfast?

Alissa Rubin is no stranger to Countercolumn. Formerly the Vienna correspondent for the Los Angeles Times, it was her who famously blew the Ambassador Bremer farewell speech, slandering Bremer in the process. (See also here for her response to my post, and my counter to it.)

Maybe you could at ease with the editorializing? I mean, every quote in the story you got undercuts your "analysis." The parliament member you talked to - who I would wager knows Iraqi politics somewhat better than you, TOLD you that Sadr was politically isolated.

Congrats on your hiring at the New York Times. Well, congrats to the Los Angeles Times, I guess.

Splash, out


Labels: , ,

Comments: Post a Comment

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Site Meter

Prev | List | Random | Next
Powered by RingSurf!

Prev | List | Random | Next
Powered by RingSurf!