# Let's Debate This Progress Report Of Iraq. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 5, 2003, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-debate-this-progress-report-of-iraq/217161 "2003-12-05T16:03:58Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2003, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-debate-this-progress-report-of-iraq/217161/21 "2003-12-05T20:30:15Z")
It’s also worth noting this from just before Halloween, “The US will **double** [:eek:] the value of contracts to repair Iraq’s oil sector to $2bn (£1.1bn) to cover the **rising** costs of **security and sabotage** there. …US Army Corps of Engineers said rising incidents of sabotage and the poor state of the infrastructure led them to believe the contracts would run out of funding in three to six months if they were not increased.” From [**US lifts value of contracts for Iraq oil repairs**](http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1066565481472&p=1012571727172) _By Joshua Chaffin in Washington Published: October 30 2003 1:31 Financial Times_ Unfortunately, you’ll need a subscription to view this article. Money talks. What do you suppose the doubling says about conditions in Iraq? ---
**Author:** ![ammo52](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/73ab20/32.png) [@ammo52](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ammo52)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2003, 8:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-debate-this-progress-report-of-iraq/217161/22 "2003-12-05T20:34:17Z")
The amassed statistics trying to quantify the progress of Iraq’s recovery are nothing more than an attempt to piece together the “other half” of the story… one which tends to get largely overshadowed by the half we hear a lot more about-- the one full of insurgents and suicide bombers and “quagmire” talk. Both sides are real, both sides are relevant, and both sides have to be viewed in the context of the other-- at least, for those wanting to see the _whole_ picture. What is going to matter, and the way in which history ultimately judges this period, is going to depend not on what Iraq is today but what it becomes a decade or so from now. How many phone lines were or weren’t operational in the winter of 2003 isn’t going to factor in very heavily in that assessment. ---
**Author:** ![CyberPundit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/76d3ee/32.png) [@CyberPundit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CyberPundit)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2003, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-debate-this-progress-report-of-iraq/217161/23 "2003-12-05T20:43:34Z")
I am sure some good things are happening in Iraq especially in the South and North but as I have argued earlier these talking-points style statistics are nearly useless in evaluating the situation. For instance the administration has been touting the rebuilt schools with great fanfare but a Newsweek reporter who actually checked out the schools found that the “reconstruction” was a good deal less than impressive. It’s also important to note that one of the big reasons so much has to be rebuilt was that it was destroyed in the looting which US forces failed to stop. There have been estimates of 12 billion dollars of destruction through looting. You have also take into account the economic disruption because of the war and the large numbers of people thrown out of work who still haven’t got their jobs back. The larger issue is why the US invaded Iraq in the first place. I don’t think anyone seriously believes that US spent more than 100 billion dollars and sacrificed hundreds of its soldiers in order to rebuild schools and restore electricity. The stated purpose was to stop the supposedly serious threat of Saddam Hussein; yet almost everything the administration told us about that threat has proved false. ---
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2003, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-debate-this-progress-report-of-iraq/217161/24 "2003-12-05T20:44:16Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by ammo52 \* > \*\*The amassed statistics trying to quantify the progress of Iraq’s recovery are nothing more than an attempt to piece together the “other half” of the story… one which tends to get largely overshadowed by the half we hear a lot more about-- the one full of insurgents and suicide bombers and “quagmire” talk. Both sides are real, both sides are relevant, and both sides have to be viewed in the context of the other-- at least, for those wanting to see the _whole_ picture. > > What is going to matter, and the way in which history ultimately judges this period, is going to depend not on what Iraq is today but what it becomes a decade or so from now. How many phone lines were or weren’t operational in the winter of 2003 isn’t going to factor in very heavily in that assessment. \*\* Well, good points, however we’re gathered here today to “Debate _This_ Progress Report of Iraq.” ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2003, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-debate-this-progress-report-of-iraq/217161/25 "2003-12-05T21:10:40Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Sam Stone \* > As far as I know, every statistic you posted is true. All the ones I’ve followed up on have borne out, anyway. Most of that information comes straight from the Civilian Provisional Authority. How about from [Bremer himself](http://www.usembassy.it/file2003_10/alia/a3100904.htm). There is a slight case of rosy glasses in both documents: “Across the country over 60,000 Iraqis now provide security to their fellow citizens”, referring to cops and such. That’s just under 2 cops per 1000 Iraqis, which way on the [low side per capita](http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_pol_cap) for ensuring domestic tranquility. Not that it’s not an improvement over zero cops, but there’s a _long_ way to go. ---
**Author:** ![blowero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/41988e/32.png) [@blowero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blowero)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2003, 9:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-debate-this-progress-report-of-iraq/217161/26 "2003-12-05T21:11:16Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by ammo52 \* > The amassed statistics trying to quantify the progress of Iraq’s recovery are nothing more than an attempt to piece together the “other half” of the story… one which tends to get largely overshadowed by the half we hear a lot more about-- the one full of insurgents and suicide bombers and “quagmire” talk. Both sides are real, both sides are relevant, and both sides have to be viewed in the context of the other-- at least, for those wanting to see the _whole_ picture. I don’t see any evidence that information about “progress” in Iraq is being suppressed. Let’s take a hypothetical situation; let’s say on a given day 10 U.S. soldiers are killed by counter-insurgents, and a power plant is restored to operation. Let’s say YOU are the editor of a newspaper; are you going to put the story about the power plant on the _front_ page, and bury the story about 10 Americans dying on the _back_ page? You really don’t think it’s newsworthy when U.S. helicopters go down and people die? Should this information be censored? > [@](#): > > What is going to matter, and the way in which history ultimately judges this period, is going to depend not on what Iraq is today but what it becomes a decade or so from now. How many phone lines were or weren’t operational in the winter of 2003 isn’t going to factor in very heavily in that assessment. I agree that miniscule details aren’t going to be important in the long run, but I think you’re losing sight of the real issues in terms of how history will ultimately judge this event. You are forgetting that the consensus of those who opposed the war was not that they didn’t think the Iraqis would be better off, but that it’s WRONG TO UNILATERALLY INVADE ANOTHER COUNTRY. You can’t retroactively say it was justified even if people end up being better off. People are in far worse shape than the Iraqis _all over the world_; that doesn’t mean that any country can just up and decide to invade another country at the drop of a hat. What if China decided they didn’t like what was going on in Africa and sent their army over there to take over? Would we give them 10 years of slack to see if things ended up better? ---
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2003, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-debate-this-progress-report-of-iraq/217161/27 "2003-12-05T21:14:39Z")
_… we have restored over three-quarters of prewar telephone services and over two-thirds of the potable water production. … there are 4,900 full-service telephone connections. We expect 50,000 by year-end._ According to the CIA, there were [**675,000** telephone mainlines](http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/iz.html#Comm) in use pre-war. Sure doesn’t jibe with the stats provided. Of course some are still of the opinion that “every statistic you posted is true.” ---
**Author:** ![ishouldbeworking](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/dbc845/32.png) [@ishouldbeworking](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ishouldbeworking)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2003, 9:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-debate-this-progress-report-of-iraq/217161/28 "2003-12-05T21:57:23Z")
## My take on this is that they should be comparing number to pre-sanction levels as opposed to pre-war levels. Life was pretty awful for Iraqis after UN sanctions, and it would be hard to do worse. [Stats on pre-sanction vs, post-sanction](http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/34695329-3D30-406E-BFDE-3E44899B7730.htm) Here’s a few tidbits to give you an idea: Life expectancy: Before sanctions: 65 years After sanctions: 59 years Infant mortality: Before sanctions: 80/1000 After sanctions: 104/1000 Adult literacy rate: Before sanctions: 89% After sanctions: 58% ## Student enrollment: Before sanctions: Primary School: 99% Secondary School: 47% Number of School Buildings: 9460 After sanctions: Primary School: 80% Secondary School: 31% Number of School Buildings: 7572 We should hardly be trumpeting about achieving sanction levels on anything. (except telephone access which actually went up during sanctions) Sure it’s great that doctors are making more money, but that only begs the question,“Can anyone afford them?” ---
**Author:** ![Chicago\_Faucet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chicago_faucet/32/13910_2.png) [@Chicago\_Faucet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chicago_Faucet)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2003, 10:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-debate-this-progress-report-of-iraq/217161/29 "2003-12-05T22:09:50Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by SimonX \* > \*\*I expect that these two stats are innaccurate and contradictory: > > \*… we have restored over three-quarters of prewar telephone services and > over two-thirds of the potable water production. > > … there are 4,900 full-service telephone connections. We expect 50,000 > by year-end.\* > > This means that it will go from 99.98% of Iraqis being w/o phones, (4900 w/phone), to 99.8% being w/o phones, (50,000 w/phones). If 4900 = 3/4 of prewar telephone services then prewar service level must’ve been only 6500 some odd phones in a country of 24mil. If these numbers are accurate, (which I doubt), this’s more evidence that pre-war levels in Iraq under Saddam and sanctions sucked really, really, hard. Children were dying and the people were suffering grievously. Reaching pre-war levels of anything in Iraq is hardly anything to brag about. \*\* Simon, this was the first thing that I picked up on as well. But then I reread it word for word. It may be splitting hairs, but I believe the first statement is talking about “service” as in active telephone lines and switchboards. The second statement is talking about active telephones attached to such a service. You are right, phone service under Saddam apparently did suck big time, and it is no big feat to get back to that point. It’s just an example of a symptom of how oppressive Saddam’s regime was. All in all, no, we cannot declare victory yet since their government is not up and running 100 percent with elected officials, nor is there a constitution in place yet. When I read this list I was impressed. Sure, the price tag was high, but it seems like more has been accomplished to this point than at the same point in the rebuilding of Germany and Japan after WWII (cite?). I’m just happy that progress is being made. The Iraqis seem to be on the correct road for success as a nation. But here in America this issue I feel will never come to a satisfactory conclusion on either side of the debate. Those for the war will point to all of these successes, while those against the war will point to the casualties that it took to get us and Iraq to this point. ---
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2003, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-debate-this-progress-report-of-iraq/217161/30 "2003-12-05T22:15:31Z")
**Chicago Faucet** , The numbers still don’t match up w/ the CIA’s numbers. ---
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2003, 10:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-debate-this-progress-report-of-iraq/217161/31 "2003-12-05T22:30:04Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by duality72 \* > \*\* > > I also remember reading a report that a number of the schools listed as “renovated” were still in pretty poor shape, but darned if I can find the link now. > \*\* [The $87 Billion Money Pit](http://www.msnbc.com/news/985304.asp) © 2003 MSNBC ---
**Author:** ![Chicago\_Faucet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chicago_faucet/32/13910_2.png) [@Chicago\_Faucet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chicago_Faucet)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2003, 10:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-debate-this-progress-report-of-iraq/217161/32 "2003-12-05T22:33:40Z")
Simon, I’m not going to fight you on it, but I just wish that they would define “telephone mainlines” more specifically. I’m assuming that they mean the wire that goes from the pole at the street to a building. It wouldn’t make sense to have 675,000 telephone lines, but only 4,900 telephones attached to that service. Maybe all we did we buy more phones and hook them up? I think this statistic is too vague to count as being true. ---
**Author:** ![ammo52](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/73ab20/32.png) [@ammo52](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ammo52)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2003, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-debate-this-progress-report-of-iraq/217161/33 "2003-12-05T22:39:54Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by blowero \* > **I don’t see any evidence that information about “progress” in Iraq is being suppressed. Let’s take a hypothetical situation; let’s say on a given day 10 U.S. soldiers are killed by counter-insurgents, and a power plant is restored to operation. Let’s say YOU are the editor of a newspaper; are you going to put the story about the power plant on the _front_ page, and bury the story about 10 Americans dying on the _back_ page? You really don’t think it’s newsworthy when U.S. helicopters go down and people die? Should this information be censored?** You tread a very fine line, just barely short of putting words in my mouth. Let’s look at what I did and didn’t say. For one thing, the emotionally charged word, “surpressed.” I didn’t say or imply that the “progress” stories are being “surpressed”-- which, to most of us, carries connotations of some willful scheme; purposefully smothering the good news simply because it is good. I said, accurately, that we hear a lot more about the downside. The existence or degree of any “liberal bias” in the media is a side road I won’t go down-- Let’s just agree, as you point out, that ANY editor is going to run “10 dead in ambush” ahead of “Baby Milk Factory up and running.” How you can go, though, from my saying that the good news is largely overshadowed by the bad news to asking me If I “really don’t think it’s newsworthy when helicopters go down” is quite a stretch. Of course it’s newsworthy, and it should be reported. And no, of course I don’t think the information out of Iraq should be “censored”-- and I never said anything resembling such a thing. (I’d be pro-“censorship” if reporting a story left coalition troops at increased risk, by blowing some aspect of their operational security, but that’s a concession I’d expect all but a handful of dopers to grant me.) My point was that a balanced perspective means ferreting out the success stories as well as the setbacks. And ferret them out you must, because they aren’t going to be front page news, for reasons I suspect we largely agree on. > [@](#): > > I agree that miniscule details aren’t going to be important in the long run, but I think you’re losing sight of the real issues in terms of how history will ultimately judge this event. You are forgetting that the consensus of those who opposed the war was not that they didn’t think the Iraqis would be better off, but that it’s WRONG TO UNILATERALLY INVADE ANOTHER COUNTRY. You can’t retroactively say it was justified even if people end up being better off. People are in far worse shape than the Iraqis _all over the world_; that doesn’t mean that any country can just up and decide to invade another country at the drop of a hat. What if China decided they didn’t like what was going on in Africa and sent their army over there to take over? Would we give them 10 years of slack to see if things ended up better? Well, I’m not sure I’m allowed to stray “off course” and discuss any long-term ramifications, or the rationale for the war itself…I’ve already been chastised by **simonX** for looking past _this_ particular progress report. And I’m certainly not _forgetting_ the stated objections of the anti-war movement, I simply disagree with them on many points. I guess my reaction to your hypothetical Chinese invasion would depend on many things…including how unified the UN had been in declaring the African activities illegal, how many chances Africa had been given to clean up it’s act, and who decided to sit the enforcement phase out once it finally came to that-- and why. From here, it looks like apples and oranges so far. ---
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2003, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-debate-this-progress-report-of-iraq/217161/34 "2003-12-05T23:01:40Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by duality72 \* > \*\* > > Power generation reached pre-war levels on Oct. 12 but have significantly slipped since. See [http://uggabugga.blogspot.com/2003\_11\_09\_uggabugga\_archive.html#106884349754964014](http://uggabugga.blogspot.com/2003_11_09_uggabugga_archive.html#106884349754964014) > \*\* There’s this as well, but it stops in Oct. [http://www.cpa-iraq.org/images/electricity4.gif](http://www.cpa-iraq.org/images/electricity4.gif) The biggest bitches I have with the reconstruction of Iraq is the insufficient planning on behalf of the Pentagon’s crew and _most importantly_ the fact that the plans of the State Dept’s future of Iraq Program that anticipated many of the problems that we’ve had to scramble to deal with. Currently, fortunately, there’s been a revival of the use of State’s plans and programs. The recon has been made unduly difficult by the Pentagon’s shortsighted hubris. See the Pentagon’s alternative to the SD’s FIP, [Office of Special Plans](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=199309). ---
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2003, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-debate-this-progress-report-of-iraq/217161/35 "2003-12-05T23:04:11Z")
Ummm… and most importantly the fact that the plans of the State Dept’s future of Iraq Program that anticipated many of the problems that we’ve had to scramble to deal with **were discarded by the Pentagon**. ---
**Author:** ![cheddarsnax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a587f6/32.png) [@cheddarsnax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cheddarsnax)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2003, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-debate-this-progress-report-of-iraq/217161/36 "2003-12-05T23:13:27Z")
“all 240 hospitals and more than 1200 clinics are open.” How many were closed during the war? Before the war? And what is meant by hospitals and clinics? Are we talking first-world style medical centers, or a room with cots? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2003, 11:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-debate-this-progress-report-of-iraq/217161/37 "2003-12-05T23:27:25Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by SimonX \* > Here’s one of Baghdadis: [http://www.spectator.co.uk/pdfs/iraqi\_poll.pdf](http://www.spectator.co.uk/pdfs/iraqi_poll.pdf) That’s a very interesting link. Somewhat of a mixed bag, but the good news is (paraphrasing): The war was: right: 50 wrong: 27 no opinion: 23 Expect life to be, in 1 yr: better: 43 worse: 16 same: 13 don’t know: 28 The bad news: Iraq is (compared to before the war) more dangerous: 75 safer: 14 same: 10 don’t know: 1 ---
**Author:** ![TheQuagmire](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/4da419/32.png) [@TheQuagmire](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TheQuagmire)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2003, 11:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-debate-this-progress-report-of-iraq/217161/38 "2003-12-05T23:49:06Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by CyberPundit \* > \*\*IIt’s also important to note that one of the big reasons so much has to be rebuilt was that it was destroyed in the looting which US forces failed to stop. There have been estimates of 12 billion dollars of destruction through looting. You have also take into account the economic disruption because of the war and the large numbers of people thrown out of work who still haven’t got their jobs back. \*\* This unemployment issue will be a ticking time bomb for the administration to contend with. The more disenfranchised Iraqis there are in the population the more likely that a hardline islamicist state will come to power. So far U.S. officials in charge of the war and rebuilding (ironic to have these two words in the same sentence) have done nothing to reassure the people that everything is going according to plan. People assisting the coalition are still being assassinated, the infrastructure is still in complete shambles, and there isn’t really a light at the end of the tunnel yet. There are only reassurances of “exit strategies” and other empty thought bubbles appearing above Rumsfeld and Bremer’s heads. > [@](#): > > \*\* > The larger issue is why the US invaded Iraq in the first place. I don’t think anyone seriously believes that US spent more than 100 billion dollars and sacrificed hundreds of its soldiers in order to rebuild schools and restore electricity. \*\* The idea that war is fought for humanitarian reasons is laughable. It’s always about ensuring the security of your own nation first. The U.S. is engaging in geopolitics, it’s in the U.S.'s interest to have direct access to the middle east for future concerns. These are times in which the U.S. is trying to decrease its reliance on traditional “allies” like saudia arabia and israel. Iraq will serve as a good host country for future U.S. military campaigns in the region. ---
**Author:** ![blowero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/41988e/32.png) [@blowero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blowero)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2003, 8:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-debate-this-progress-report-of-iraq/217161/39 "2003-12-06T08:16:59Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by ammo52 \* > You tread a very fine line, just barely short of putting words in my mouth. Oh, please. If you think I have violated board protocol, the proper procedure is to email a moderator and have them decide. > [@](#): > > Let’s look at what I did and didn’t say. For one thing, the emotionally charged word, “surpressed.” I didn’t say or imply that the “progress” stories are being “surpressed”-- which, to most of us, carries connotations of some willful scheme; purposefully smothering the good news simply because it is good. I said, accurately, that we hear a lot more about the downside. I assume you mean _suppressed_, and I don’t see anything “emotionally charged” about that word. It simply means “kept from public knowledge”. If you say we “hear a lot more about the downside”, there is an inescapable implication that we _don’t_ hear as much about the good side. Unless you are saying there _isn’t_ much of a good side, you are implying that the information is somehow suppressed. > [@](#): > > The existence or degree of any “liberal bias” in the media is a side road I won’t go down-- Let’s just agree, as you point out, that ANY editor is going to run “10 dead in ambush” ahead of “Baby Milk Factory up and running.” How you can go, though, from my saying that the good news is largely overshadowed by the bad news to asking me If I “really don’t think it’s newsworthy when helicopters go down” is quite a stretch. Of course it’s newsworthy, and it should be reported. Then I fail to see your point. If you are happy with the way the news is being reported, then what exactly is causing this good news/ bad news information mismatch of which you speak? Or am I putting words in your mouth again? > [@](#): > > And no, of course I don’t think the information out of Iraq should be “censored”-- and I never said anything resembling such a thing. Again, if you think I’ve misquoted you, inform a moderator. I believe my argument was perfectly reasonable, and I have not misrepresented anything you said. > [@](#): > > My point was that a balanced perspective means ferreting out the success stories as well as the setbacks. And ferret them out you must, because they aren’t going to be front page news, for reasons I suspect we largely agree on. The stories are going to be proportionally as close to the front page as their importance warrants. That’s how newspapers work. If it’s important “good” news, it will be on the front page. Or have you forgotten the endless touting of the official declaration of the end of combat, and the countless pictures of Saddam’s statue being toppled in virtually every media source? Or Bush making headlines every time he pays a visit to the troops? > [@](#): > > I guess my reaction to your hypothetical Chinese invasion would depend on many things…including how unified the UN had been in declaring the African activities illegal, how many chances Africa had been given to clean up it’s act, and who decided to sit the enforcement phase out once it finally came to that-- and why. I disagree. I think if you are honest, you will admit that there is _no possible_ state of affairs that would ever cause the U.S. to accept such a unilateral invasion by a Communist country. We would insist that they work through the UN, as we should have done with Iraq. > [@](#): > > From here, it looks like apples and oranges so far. Don’t know what you mean by that. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2003, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-debate-this-progress-report-of-iraq/217161/40 "2003-12-06T22:03:25Z")
First problem is, we don’t have many sources of info on this stuff, even fewer which might be called “reliable”. So “debate” becomes pretty much impossible. And, eventually, I expect that list to be an accurate presentation of facts on the ground. Maybe not this quickly, it may be wildly optimistic. But the Iraq mess is _our_ mess now, we are obliged by the merest conventions of common decency to help these people out. After all, it’s only money, and we can always cut taxes again. But unless we resolve the social and political issues in Iraq we are most likely improving the infrastructure and backdrop against which the civil war will take place. Whoop-de-fucka-doo. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-debate-this-progress-report-of-iraq/217161.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-debate-this-progress-report-of-iraq/217161.md?page=3)