If you respect professionals at their job, you will take their word for it. If you don't, then you won't.
Do you expect the general public to take George Bush's word on progress reports in the ME? He mislead the public prior to going to war, he mislead the public about when the mission was accomplished, he mislead the public about "things going very well" repeatedly, he finally admitted things were not going well and replaced his leading field general in Iraq, he disregards the majority public and congressional view that "the surge" is a bad idea, and you expect me (and the rest of the public) to believe his judgment on how the "surge plan" is progressing without hard evidence to back up what will eventually be his qualitative judgment?
Few member of the general public "respect professionals at their job" when it comes to the President, particularly when it comes to his plan in Iraq. The President had the respect you describe 3-4 years ago, and has lost it. There is a reason he lost that respect, and it's not because he has done a good professional job.
If you are carrying a weapon, your commander will let you know what your mission is and what his/her expectations are. If you are not, then you will be privy to the overall strategic plan and a general progress report as related by you Commander in Chief and others authorized to inform the media.
If that is all the data that is going to be forthcoming then the Commander in Chief will lose support for the mission, and it will end at a time not of his choosing.
If the plan is to clear and hold, I still don't see why any outside observer objects to knowing which areas have been cleared and held, and then how violence in those areas compares to violence in areas not yet cleared and held. It's easy to measure, and it is a clear indicator of progress (or lack thereof). The refusal to make that milestone-style information available makes my support for the surge plan less - not more. I'm hesitant to support anything we can't measure. |
