"Do you expect the general public to take George Bush's word on progress reports in the ME?"
Well, it was you who said that...
The average person has never been in the military, has never been to Iraq, doesn't speak Arabic, is not Muslim, and has never managed much more than their own family
You're confusing two separate discussions. Let me clarify them for you.
The first sentence involves measuring progress of the surge. Do you want numerical measurements of improvements in regions taken and cleared versus regions not yet taken and cleared, or do you want GB to tell you "things are going well" or "things are going less well than expected"? I argue the public won't believe GB's assessment, since we don't trust him, so numerical measurment of progress is preferable. The second sentence above involves ability to develop an alternative plan to the surge. Joe Public isn't an expert in the area or very knowledgeable about Iraq, population control, military affairs, etc. so asking Joe Public to come up with an alternative to the surge is not a good idea. They are two separate and unrelated issues. Don't confuse them.
If a patient has cancer and a doctor proposes operation A, any observer can measure the basic success of A (the patient lives or dies). That doesn't mean any observer can come up with a better surgical alternative to A. See the difference?
Now you want them to second guess the President and all his expert advisors?
You're putting words in my mouth - I said I want to measure the progress of GB's "surge" plan. Clear and hold involves land, we can measure taken land versus untaken land and get an objective, numbers-based conclusion of success (or lack thereof). Over time, taken and cleared land should have less acts of violence than untaken land. If that isn't true, the surge is failing. If it is true, the surge is succeeding. Why anyone would object to data that helps us to measure success of the plan is beyond me.
None of us expect GB to honestly report if the "surge" plan is not working - do you? He has mislead the public about progress in Iraq for 34 out of the previous 35 months, only reporting an honest assessment when his party lost control of Congress. He has lost the trust of the American people in his reporting on progress, and in doing so has damaged the mission in Iraq. Without public support, the mission in Iraq will end sooner rather than later.
I'd take numbers - which are harder to fudge - over GB's qualitative review of progress any day. |
