| About | |
| Contact Us | |
| Articles | |
| Topic Index | |
| Reports | |
| Quotes | |
| On the Web | |
| Links | |
| TW Tracker | |
| Support | |
Times Watch for
December 16, 2003
Joy Already Fading in Iraq
Well, that didn't take long. One day after an image of a bearded, bedraggled Saddam Hussein filled up half the front page, Tuesday's story by Edward Wong says it's back to bad news in Iraq: "The joyous bursts of gunfire that echoed throughout parts of Iraq on Sunday are already a distant memory."
The story's teaser headline underlines the Times' gloomy take: "With one chapter ended, a sense that this one's even worse."
In "Joy Fades as Iraqis Chafe Under a Grim Occupation," Wong profiles two dissatisfied brothers from Mahawil, Iraq: "They wanted Saddam Hussein to tell them--to tell all of Iraq--why the bullet-scarred remains of more than 3,000 people had been dug up here last summer. They wanted to know why one of their cousins was among those found, why this cousin had disappeared 12 years earlier while buying flour at the village market, why members of the Baath Party had killed so many of their own countrymen."
Wong then gets to the heart of his argument: "Those were the easy questions. More important, said the brothers, Dhiya and Ayad Abed, they wanted to know why life had gotten worse for them since the American-led forces ousted Mr. Hussein. Why did they lack electricity and fuel, why were there no jobs, why were armed bandits roaming the streets? 'It was inevitable that he be captured,' said Dhiya Abed, 27. 'There was no other way for this to end. But the Americans have to do something for us because things are worse than before.' The Abed brothers and others in this rural area provide a sobering glimpse into the impact of Mr. Hussein's capture on Iraqis, including those who suffered enormously under his rule. The joyous bursts of gunfire that echoed throughout parts of Iraq on Sunday are already a distant memory. Many people are left wondering how they will push on with their daily lives in a country controlled by a foreign power and filled with political and economic uncertainty."
So Saddam's capture will have no long-term impact on daily life and citizen morale in Iraq? Times Watch doubts that. After all, most Iraqis don't live by the New York Times news cycle--after enduring 25 years of terrorizing rule by this tyrant and his family, his incarceration (and build up to his trial) will surely be more than a one-day story.
For the rest of Wong on the "grim occupation," click here.
• Saddam Hussein | Iraq War | Edward Wong
The First Refuge of a Scoundrel
Tuesday's Krugman column, "Patriots and Profits," is another unfocused compilation of leftwing anti-war complaints disguised as a coherent argument. He cites Halliburton, war profiteering, and an unrelated scandal involving the president's younger brother Neil Bush. Then Krugman awkwardly works in this defense: "Some Americans still seem to feel that even suggesting the possibility of profiteering is somehow unpatriotic."
Krugman doesn't name any of these Americans making these scurrilous accusations. No surprise there. Accusing Republicans (without evidence) of slandering Democrats as unpatriotic is one of Krugman's favorite pieces of anti-Republican boilerplate, typically wedged into a column whenever his stock of inspired vitriol is running low. This latest example is just one particularly strained attempt by Krugman to seize imaginary high ground by suggesting people with his views are being slandered by Republicans as unpatriotic.
Paul Krugman, October 3: "Republicans have repeatedly impugned their opponents' patriotism. Last year Tom DeLay, the House majority leader, said Democrats "don't want to protect the American people….They will do anything, spend all the time and resources they can, to avoid confronting evil." On this occasion Krugman at least delivers a piece of evidence (albeit an unconvincing one) to back up his sanctimonious assertion.
Most of the times Krugman simply states his "Republicans impugn Democratic patriotism" idea as fact. Here's Krugman from September 5: "Mr. Bush seems to have a serious case of 'l'etat, c'est moi': he impugns the patriotism of anyone who questions his decisions." Krugman's documentation: Nothing.
And from April 25: "And claiming that those who don't support tax cuts are somehow unpatriotic is not an answer." Krugman's documentation: Nothing.
Krugman from Nov. 8, 2002: "Even criticizing the Bush administration's policies will become far more difficult. It will be hard even to find out what it's up to; the most secretive administration in the nation's history will now be even less forthcoming. And anyone who criticizes the administration, even on purely domestic issues, will be accused of lacking patriotism." Krugman's documentation: You guessed it.
For more of Krugman and patriotism, click here.
• Columnists | Iraq War | Paul Krugman | Patriotism
After Saddam's Capture: Beating Around the Bushes
"After 12 Years, Sweet Victory: The Bushes' Pursuit of Hussein," Tuesday's front-page story from Todd Purdum, personalizes (and thus reduces) the capture of Saddam Hussein to a matter of the Bush family settling scores with an ancient enemy: "Now, after more than a dozen years, the drama for both generations of Bushes is over."
One wouldn't expect a reference to Saturday Night Live comedian Dana Carvey in the fourth paragraph of such a story, but there it is: "The words could fit the father, who compared Mr. Hussein to Hitler and whose viewpoint the comedian Dana Carvey used to imitate with a staccato, 'Saddam: baaaad!'"
Spying a potential wedge between Bush Sr. and Bush Jr. on the wisdom of going after Hussein, Purdum talks up the Bush Sr. side: "The first President Bush has never expressed public doubt about his decision to stop the 1991 war with Mr. Hussein still in power. He did so in part because the international coalition that he had assembled to drive the Iraqi Army out of Kuwait would have crumbled and because he assumed Mr. Hussein, humbled by his military defeat, would fall....There were ample reasons for the first President Bush not to go after Mr. Hussein. The current vice president and then the secretary of defense, Dick Cheney, outlined some of them in an interview with the British Broadcasting Corporation in 1992...."
To his credit, Purdum also notes some people actually favor George W. Bush's pursuit of Saddam: "But the capture of Mr. Hussein in his earthen hiding place was the sweetest kind of vindication for a president who has earned worldwide skepticism and criticism--along with substantial praise--for his Iraq policy."
For more of Purdum on the Bushes vs. Hussein, click here.
• George W. Bush | George Bush Sr. | Saddam Hussein | Iraq War | Todd Purdum
E-mail TimesWatch Director, Clay Waters, with TimesWatch feedback at cwaters@mediaresearch.org