0
   

Oliver North: Back in Iraq

 
 
Reply Fri 16 Apr, 2004 07:24 am
AR-RAMADI, Iraq -- This week in a primetime White House news conference, President Bush described recent fighting in Iraqi areas of ar-Ramadi and Fallujah as "tough." It is tough, war always is. During my first 40 hours on the ground, anti-Iraqi forces haven't stopped shooting at the Marines, making it more difficult to get around.

But that's not to say progress isn't being made and those who are inciting the violence aren't being brought to justice -- it is, and they are. And it would be refreshing if just one member of the vaunted White House press corps or one of the television channel's chattering chumps would show a sliver of confidence in America's armed forces and their ability to defeat the terrorists with whom they are engaged in Iraq. I can report that the troops here -- specifically members of the 1st Marine Division out of Camp Pendleton, Calif., and the Army's 1st Brigade from Fort Riley, Kan., with whom I am traveling -- are "performing brilliantly," as the president said Tuesday night.

In fact, in ar-Ramadi, it's going a lot better than some might perceive. While much of the media's attention has focused on Fallujah, where four American civilians were killed, here in ar-Ramadi, Marines and soldiers are socking it to the enemy. "The fighting has been intense, but we've been kicking butt everywhere we go," is the way one Marine sergeant described it to me.

Earlier this week, these young Marines and soldiers were engaged in a violent, early-morning firefight with anti-Iraqi forces that resulted in four enemy dead, nine detainees and 16 weapons captured. Fighting with them were friendly Iraqis who aren't going to let their cities and towns become safe havens for terrorist cells. Those anti-Iraqi forces, it should be pointed out, are a mixture of foreign fighters, some Baathist loyalists and members of terrorist cells. While the press back home complains that Iraqis are "rising up" against American forces, they overlook the fact that there are a lot of foreign fighters involved in, and inciting, this violence. They've come into this country to disrupt and prevent democratic reforms from taking place.

During last week's attack, 12 U.S. Marines were killed. Now, several days later, members of the 1st Marine Division returned to that same neighborhood and captured nine more terrorist leaders. One of those terrorists who was wounded in the previous attack had been treated in a hospital and was recuperating in the home of a "friend" when U.S. Marines, with the cooperation of Iraqis in the neighborhood, knocked on the door and took him into custody.

"One more terrorist off the street and one less bad guy who, later on, could have injured a Marine, sailor or soldier," was what a Marine squad leader told me.

During that engagement, it was very clear that the enemy had no intention of taking on this Marine battalion, which did everything but send out invitations for a fight. They went in to root out the terrorist cells who have been operating out of ar-Ramadi and Fallujah, which because they have basically been left alone for much of the last year, were easy places for terrorists to find sanctuary.

But knowing the Marines were coming in to eliminate problem residents, the people in ar-Ramadi neighborhoods have been very supportive, freely opening their homes for Marines to search. Among both the terrorists and the friendly Iraqis, there is a new and very healthy respect for the 1st Marine Division.

But getting that respect didn't happen by accident, and it wasn't luck. The Marines and soldiers who are pulling terrorists out of these neighborhoods and denying them sanctuary earned that respect. They've trained and continue to work hard to separate the good guys from the bad guys. They don't just go in, drop artillery and kill everyone, including civilians. They surgically remove the terrorists and limit the damage to the infrastructure, which makes a big difference to the population.

It should also be pointed out that many of the Marines accomplishing this mission had been home for only five or six months before they turned around, put their flak jackets and helmets back on, and returned to Iraq. The troops that are here are adequate to the task. You can sense among the local civilian population a tremendous respect for these units -- they're organized for the kind of operations they're conducting, and they're succeeding.

And just to check my own assessment with somebody who's been here since the Marines returned, I asked Lance Cpl. Baggett of the 1st Marine Division, "Are we winning?" His answer: "Yes, sir, no doubt about it." Let's see which American newspaper is willing to splash that revelation across its front page.

Link
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 2,199 • Replies: 43
No top replies

 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Apr, 2004 07:37 am
In a just society O North would be behind bars, imho.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Apr, 2004 08:42 am
Whatever your opinion of Ollie is, what he wrote here is right on according to what my military friends tell me. The "anybody but Bush" crowd continually calls Bush a liar who 'misled the American people.' I feel the same way about those reporting the war in such a way that the average American on the street sees nothing but negative results and is not informed of much that is going right. This, I think, is blatant dishonesty.
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Apr, 2004 09:15 am
It's strange how our perceptions (of the news coverage from Iraq) are so different, Foxfyre.

My perception is (although I admit not living in the USA it's only as an impression, and what is reported here about what is being reported there, if you see what I mean) that the American public have had their news packaged, filtered and sanitised so the no anti-Bush sentiment filters through.
No body bags, no civilian casualty figures, no pictures of injured and maimed non-combatants, no figures of American wounded vs American dead, no accounts of F16s being used against shantytowns, that kind of thing.

Which is blatant dishonesty, and right-wing propaganda.
0 Replies
 
infowarrior
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Apr, 2004 09:20 am
North has always enjoyed working for shadow govewrnments.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Apr, 2004 09:56 am
Quote:
the average American on the street sees nothing but negative results and is not informed of much that is going right. This, I think, is blatant dishonesty.


You just did it again. "Nothing but" is false. Sloppy.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Apr, 2004 10:13 am
McTag in all due respect, the media is reporting all the things that you say it is not. The American media does have an aversion to putting up pictures of body bags for whatever reason. As for some of the other things you allege in your comments, I do not agree that the U.S. military is guilty of acts constituting what I would call war crimes.

And blatham, I think it is quite sloppy to suggest there are no media sources out there who are reporting nothing but negative news re the war in Iraq, or, if good news is reported, it is obscured by negative headlines and buried so deep few ever get to it.

I challenge you to go to the NY Times, The Washington Post, the San Francisco Examiner, or any of what we affectionately call 'mainsream media' in this country and find me a straight news piece in any of them that puts an emphasis on anything good happening in Iraq. You might possibly find something in the NY Post or Washington Times with much smaller circulation and that no self-respecting liberal will read as a general rule.
0 Replies
 
infowarrior
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Apr, 2004 10:17 am
ROFL!!

Why would anyone with an education beyond the 8th grade want to read the Washington Times or NY Post?
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Apr, 2004 10:39 am
Again you make my point infowarrior, and I rest my case.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Apr, 2004 11:44 am
Quote:
And blatham, I think it is quite sloppy to suggest there are no media sources out there who are reporting nothing but negative news re the war in Iraq, or, if good news is reported, it is obscured by negative headlines and buried so deep few ever get to it.


And careless again. That wasn't your claim.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Apr, 2004 11:53 am
The signing of the Iraqi constitution received wide press and television coverage, just among other "positive" events on Iraq. The truth is that the negative is beginning to outweigh the positive day-by-day. Anybody wanting to swallow propaganda to the contrary is emulating a bird from Australia.
0 Replies
 
Tarantulas
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Apr, 2004 11:59 am
I believe that's our famous "ad hominem" fallacy floating to the surface again.

I like Colonel North. You can tell that he loves being in action with the Marines, and he does a great job of reporting the actions over there. With his military experience, he can give a much better account of military events than the civilian reporters can. And when he's interviewing one of the Marines on camera, the last thing he does is to ask the Marine if there's anyone he wants to say "hello" to back home. You don't see that very often from the other reporters.

We are hearing reports about Iraq that apparently aren't making it to the UK - all the deaths and injuries but without pictures of body bags. If anything, the US press focuses on everything that's negative and ignores the positive occurrences. That's left-wing propaganda, but most of our press is decidedly left-leaning.

One exception, of course, is Fox News. I believe it's called Sky News in the UK. I saw an interview this morning with a soldier who had just returned from Iraq. They asked him to describe what it was like. He talked about the different projects they were working on, rebuilding schools and power stations, things like that. And he said the majority of Iraqis are very appreciative of their work, and looking forward to having a better life because of it. There was a small minority who hated the soldiers and wanted to kill them, but most Iraqis do not subscribe to those beliefs.

In all fairness, I have to say that the press generally reports accidents and disasters and deaths because that's what they consider to be news. The motto I've heard is "if it bleeds, it leads." Some of us had a seminar many years ago with a news director from some TV station, and we asked her why nuclear power had such a bad reputation with the press that they could only report negative things about it. She explained that a nuclear power plant operating safely day after day is not newsworthy. She said that passenger planes take off and land safely every day, and that's not news either. But if one crashes, THAT'S news. So I guess an armed attack on US troops is news, but US troops building yet another school is not. But it seems to me that the press could gather together some positive accomplishments and run a story on those every now and then, if only to preserve the appearance that they are reporting events fairly.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Apr, 2004 12:07 pm
You might as well have listened to Richard Nixon lauding Cambodia as a wonderful vacation spot.
0 Replies
 
Tarantulas
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Apr, 2004 12:16 pm
Ah, sarcasm, the last resort of someone who has nothing productive to say.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Apr, 2004 12:32 pm
Nothing sarcastic about that. Point out what is productive here? That the New York Post is a viable source of good jornalism?
0 Replies
 
hobitbob
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Apr, 2004 12:34 pm
It is this lionization of North by the far right that contributes to my questioning the sanity of those on the far right. Especially when they then turn around and make comments about "morality." Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Apr, 2004 12:38 pm
Tarantulas wrote:
One exception, of course, is Fox News. I believe it's called Sky News in the UK.


Fox News isn't called Sky news, but SKY TV (with all its different channels, like Sky News, Sky Sports etc) is owned by media mogul Rupert Murdoch as well as Fox News.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Apr, 2004 12:45 pm
People who post from "Solon" as a 'credible source' or defend it as a credible source then hold the "New York Post' in contempt? Sarcasm could indeed be called for here.
0 Replies
 
hobitbob
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Apr, 2004 12:57 pm
I have always been impressed with Solon the Lawgiver. I wonder if you meant Salon.com?
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Apr, 2004 03:45 pm
In the British media you'd be hard pressed to find any report of a "positive" nature coming out of Iraq. Indeed with no security yet, little rebuilding is possible, and sabotage is rife. That much seems logical and clear.

So I am at a loss to understand where all these positive stories are coming from. Phantoms, or non-stories, it seems to me.

It seems to be quieter in the south of the country, where the British troops are killing fewer citizens that the Americans further north.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Oliver North: Back in Iraq
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 05/01/2024 at 10:57:25