- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
To anticipate the only rebuttal argument our resident contrarians can try (without degenerating into strained irony, that is): the news networks are/were correct to retain retired general and staff officers from the DoD for commentary on the invasion and occupation of Iraq as they were the "professionals" at such things.
EXCEPT, as Glenn goes to pains to note, these 'professionals' were not confining their commentary to just the practical issues at hand and virtually parroted the Bush Administration's line of it being "a cake-walk". Worse, there was no effort to balance off their blithe optimism with more measured voices against both the invasion and the conduct of the occupation.
Even now, five years into this disaster, there continues to be a derth of dissenting voices against the continuation of this costly and frankly worthless occupation. The scandal continues unabated, and shatters what little trust might be afforded the outlets we so often depend upon for news of events. After all, why should anyone believe anything from the media when they continue to grant air-time to those who have been repeatedly proven wrong?
A truly, truly tragic legacy the Bush Administration leaves us all.
This encapsulates
