lurkette

Yes.

The real mistake in thinking about being in Iraq is assuming that our presence there is either completely positive or completely negative. For every story about adored military personnel, there's another one about soldiers abusing power and privilege. For every story about people whose houses were mistakenly demolished by the U.S. military, there's another story about people who can come out of a decade of hiding now that Saddam has gone.

I think it's unfortunate that pro-war and anti-war forces both assume that any coverage that conflicts with their views is unbalanced. You have to have some tolerance for ambiguity in a situation like this. Did we go in prematurely and with bad planning? Yes. Is it making things harder for everyone on the ground in Iraq? Yes. Is it a good thing that we ousted Saddam? Yes. Are we fucking some things up? Yes. Do we need to stay, regardless, and clean up our mess (or beg the UN to clean it up for us)? Yes. Do all of these points of view need to be heard? YES. The "real Iraq" is the one that doesn't fit neatly into politically-driven points of view.

Incidentally, the last positive story I heard about the U.S. Military in Iraq was yesterday on NPR. They have been very good about presenting a good balance of stories where the US Military is making a positive differences, and places where the system is clearly falling apart and not working.

edit - just re-read everyone's posts and realized that I said pretty much the same thing everyone else has said Sorry. But well, pile on!!!

__________________
"If ten million people believe a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing."

- Anatole France