Il mondo è tornato ad essere un posto normale. Ricordate, qualche settimana fa, l’editoriale del New York Times (la password per leggerlo cercatela qui) che invocava il ritiro statunitense dall’Iraq? Il giorno dopo, giornali e telegiornali italiani …

The second piece is also not at all critical of the war or the surge. It describes the problems, but it doesn’t state any opposition to U.S. troops being in Iraq. In fact, if you look at the end of the article, Pollack clearly is opposed to withdrawing troops, and he argues for some kind of “containment” strategy — meaning a semi-permanent U.S. military presence in Iraq.

You’ll have to do better than this if you want to show that O’Hanlon and Pollack are liberals who have suddenly started to support the war after being harshly critical of it.

http://www.brook.edu/views/papers/pascual/20070228pollack.htm

O’Hanlon and Pollack have never been “harshly critical of the war effort,” Gaius. They both supported the invasion and have supported the war ever since. And back in September 2003, O’Hanlon was telling the media that things were going great in Iraq, even while he writes now that he was a critic back then. He wasn’t.

If that is what it looks like to two analysts who have harshly criticized the Bush administration, just think what it looks like to a really objective reporter….