"How did it come to pass that an opposition's measure of a president's foreign policy was all or nothing, success or "failure"? The answer is that the political absolutism now normal in Washington arrived at the moment--Nov. 7, 2000--that our politics subordinated even a war against terror to seizing the office of the presidency." - Daniel Henninger - WSJ 11/18/05
"the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish thoughts." - George Orwell

Friday, August 03, 2007

To the MSM, Shift is a Euphemism for Withdrawal

The behind the Times offers up a dish on Defense Secretary Gates’ “blunt” review on the progress in Iraq. What strikes me in the tone of “articles” on our efforts in Iraq is that what is honest assessment is viewed as some kind of admonition of guilt for something; each is an ‘we told you so’ moment for the msm.

For all its supposed wisdom and intelligence it always gets down to its not being over yet therefore and even without actually saying it, it has failed.

“In one of his bluntest assessments of the progress of the administration’s Iraq strategy, Mr. Gates said, “I think the developments on the political side are somewhat discouraging at the national level.” He said that despite the Sunni withdrawal, “my hope is that it can all be patched back together.”’

Following this revelation that all is not perfect and that the new strategy is not a silver bullet on its own, the toilet paper then leads us to the place it wants the reader:

“Mr. Gates gave little indication whether he was leaning toward recommending a shift in the administration’s strategy next month, when officials are planning to review whether progress has been achieved by sending nearly 30,000 additional American troops to Iraq.”

What is this “shift” the paper refers to? Or rather what do they want and expect the “shift” to be? If this “shift” is not what the toilet paper means by “shift,” will there be holy hell to pay?

The “shift” is a euphemism for “redeployment,” “retreat,” “draw-down,” “time-line,” and “withdrawal.” Now, were the media actually unbiased, “shift” it would not matter so much whether a “shift” was new tactics, more soldiers, or withdrawal for example. But, “shift” has only been allowed to be one thing and as the president hasn’t ordered this “shift” anything else is wrong and a recipe for failure; especially since we have already failed.

These people (the msm and antiwar folks) have lost and so has the nation; therefore there can only be one “strategy” or “shift.” This unbending “shift” is what has been standing still, unbending and stubborn since the onset.

The administrations and military’s strategies and reassessments deal with changing realities oftentimes from failures (how else does one learn) and other times from what works. The other side of the argument being the msm and Left, has never had a different strategy. The idea when entering into a field of battle is to win and you keep morphing and changing in an effort to do just that.

This does not mean endlessly, but it should recognize how rapidly things have moved from the first day into Iraq even though they don’t want to or even can’t if they tried.

As has been said many a time here; this is too big for such a huge of seriousness.

Trackback: http://haloscan.com/tb/blandlyurbane/9011782854374808303

  • DeMediacratic Nation Blogrolls

    Please give this Post/Blog a Vote - Top Blogs

  • Trackposted to Perri Nelson's Website, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, Adam's Blog, Right Truth, Webloggin, Cao's Blog, Leaning Straight Up, The Bullwinkle Blog, Pursuing Holiness, third world county, Woman Honor Thyself, The World According to Carl, Nuke's news and views, Pirate's Cove, The Pink Flamingo, CommonSenseAmerica, Dumb Ox Daily News, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.


    © blogger templates 3 column | Webtalks