The number of refugees is a assertion that can be objectively evaluated. Either many thousands of Iraqis are fleeing the country, or few Iraqis are fleeing. Steyn said few are fleeing. I have not seen recent articles still alleging that many thousands of Iraqis were fleeing, so Steyn appears to be correct on this point.
However, AFAIK there haven’t been any corrections or apologies from the media and international aid agencies who had put out the story about the hundreds of thousands streaming out of Iraq. Why it ridiculous to think that they ought to explicitly acknowledge having been wrong?
(1) Could you at least provide links to these stories that talked about “hundreds of thousands streaming out of Iraq” so we can see who made the claims and how widespread they were?
(2) Well, how about corrections and apologies regarding the existence of huge caches of WMDs?
december, just so we can clarify how whacked out your perceptions of reality are, do you honestly believe that the press here in the U.S. is beating up on Bush?!?! What freakin’ alternate universe are you living in and how can I move there?
I gave a cite that referred to the ABC story with that reference. I don’t have a cite to the original ABC story, but nobody disputed that it was broadcast.
Several conservative sources have admitted to having been wrong. I have admitted to having been wrong on another thread.
They are both beating up on Bush and supporting him. From your POV perhaps they don’t beat him up enough; from my POV they beat him up too much.
In regards to Mark Steyn’s article on the climate in Afghanistan, here is his quote about the weather there (written January 7):
While this may be true, it is far from typical (and it is a presumably the high temperature quoted in a place that has strong diurnal temperature ranges because of its dry climate).
Here is a discussion of general climatic conditions in Afghanistan. I give you a few relevant quotes:
Note the chart at the bottom in which the average temperature in the winter of 1981 (over how many months, I do not know) was -3.3 C. This may not be so frigid by Canadian standards, but it is plenty cold!
Anyway, we can probably find more data…but you get the picture here. Steyn uses very selective facts to make the points he wants to make. And you buy right into it.
Plenty cold enough for what? The explicit, widely-reported claim was that: In winter it would be too cold to prosecute a war in Afghanistan. We know that claim was wrong. Why? Because the US did just that.
BTW -3.3[sup]o[/sup] C = 27[sup]o[/sup] F is an average temperature, not an average high temperature. By comparison, Scranton, PA has an average high in January of 33[sup]o[/sup] F and an average low of 21[sup]o[/sup] F, so their average temperature is also around 27[sup]o[/sup] F. This is cold enough to require winter clothing, but certainly not so cold as to preclude making war.
Are there links to articles in the BBC or other reputable news organizations that were egregiously wrong re: Afghanistan?
Is there a link to Steyn’s rebuttal article on Afghanistan?
I would like to read more before I can admit to the reputable news organizations being wrong. A point to consider before delving in: Erroneous reporting is vastly different from wrong predictions.
Re: winter in Afghanistan, one has to realize that the country does not have extensive indoor heating systems. Even -3 degrees celsius in poor countries is a nightmare to contend with, especially for the majority living in the lower economic strata.
Here’s a Christian Science Monitor article from Nov. 2001, which was typical of many. Here’s an article from ABC News showing that the international aid community was hyping the weather.
Of course, what actually happened was that the US secured a rapid victory, regardless of the weather, and provided relief thus solving the humanitarian crisis.
Sometimes they’re not so different. When the Australian Broadcasting System incorrectly predicted hundreds of thousands of refugees, one can say that was a mere wrong prediction. However, it also constituted an erronious analysis of actual conditions in Iraq.
Granted, but the allegation was that the cold weather would prevent a military victory.
Here and here are two articles that suggest that it was not just international aid agencies that were playing up the harsh winter. It was soldiers for the Northern Alliance, Russian soldiers, and even the U.S. military itself (which was arguing it could be a potential advantage).
And, as near as I can tell, most of the aide agencies were concerned about the winter in terms of the Afghani civilians not the U.S. military.
When Michael Moore pulls this sort careless use of facts, you conservatives eat him for breakfast. Steyn does it and you practically worship him as an oracle.
Just realized that this is the same article I linked to. It seems to me that it shows that his claim that the analysis of the winter conditions as being harsh was not just mainly due to international aid agencies. It also shows the the press was giving ample coverage to the U.S. military’s claim that these cold conditions would work to the military’s advantage. That is hardly the story of what was being said by others as painted by your friend Steyn.
Yes. Maybe that’s what happened, but I don’t think even the U.S. miltary planners knew that they could win that quickly. Nor did they know how mild or cold that particular winter was going to be and how early the cold conditions would set in. There are also lots of people who have driven drunk without getting into an accident. Would you say that we should therefore conclude (especially for those who have a 100% record of not getting in an accident drunk) that their being drunk and driving is not a concern that needs to be considered?
By the way, it may well be true that Steyn predicted that the winter would not prevent a quick military victory. But, given that you are making such a big deal about this prediction (which was, as I noted, also talked about in the CS Monitor piece), it might be useful to actually have a quote from Steyn from before the war. I did a google search on “Steyn brutal Afghan winter” and all the stuff it seemed to pull up, like the ones you linked to, were things Steyn said after the U.S. victory.
By the way, I finally found some nice data from the National Climate Data Center concerning climate in Afghanistan. Here it is so you can play around with it yourself. Note the following:
For January, mean temperatures for the 7 cities shown range from 13 F in a place called “North Salang”, a bit northwest of Kabul to 28 F in Kabul itself and 41 and 45 F for two cities in the south. The mean maxima are 20 F, 40 F, 54 F and 58 F for these places, respectively. And the mean minima are -2 F, 19 F, 32 F, and 40 F.
So, yeah, Kabul on average is similar to Scranton (2 degrees colder at night and 7 degrees warmer for the high)…which may not be “brutal” but is plenty cold, especially for civilians who might not have adequate heat, clothing, and food. And, North Salang’s numbers (and numbers nearly as cold for a place called “Chaghcharan”) put it on par with Montreal…even a bit colder in the low, I believe. And, I can tell you from personal experience that characterizing Montreal winters as “brutal” is something that few would quibble with! (We learn below that North Salang is high up…11,000 ft…and so it is probably not the most representative conditions, but a lot of the fighting was expected to be done…and was done…in the mountains.)
I don’t know exactly how representative these places are and how NCDC decided which places to show. But, this page gives NCDC’s overview of Afghanistan’s climate. Here’s a quote:
Let me cover an item or two, more for others than for the OP who is insensible to information:
(a) The hundreds of thousands Iraqi refugees December refers to is a pre-war ‘expectation’ or prepatory issue, I do not recall reading actual reports of that. I know the folks who worked on this personally. Good friends of mine now, largely from the IOM. They based their planning and expectations off of 1990-1991 actual experience. It did not happen. It’s like the weather, you prepare for a bad storm and are happy when it doesn’t happen. Why didn’t the Iraqis stream out like in 1991? Open question. Border issues, lack of transport, inability, fear, confidence… no one knows precisely. The anticipation, contra the ideological smear, was good thinking. Taking out insurance for something that does not happen does not mean that taking out insurance was in error. The planning for major refugee streams is not the same as claiming that they are happening, I would think someone in your claimed profession would be able to grasp the utility of insurance.
(b) As to the “article” I note the revisions the Administration has undertaken in regards to troop presence and intensified efforts to install a secure situation, as well as the recent organized strikes against US columns. All reports I hear from variety of sources, Iraqi friends, other Arabs with Iraqi connexions, USG, etc. tell me that the security situation is tense and in many areas declining. The fact this idiot was able to drive across the empty desert from Amman to Baghdad w/o incident and then swing North is a testament to luck. I might add I fail to see how a journo swinging through on a rapid tour is able to eyeball for cholera (of course the areas said to be of major concern are to the south) I don’t know. The article is bullshit tripe.
Now, let me note, for example, some items from yesterday’s (Sunday 1 June) daily security assessment report by int’l security assessment team (among whom I have amigos):
There is more, but largely of trivial interest. Of positive note, nighttime gun battles in Baghdad are reported to be decreasing but moving West, but organized or semi-organized attacks against US forces have appeared.