In today’s New York Times is an unsigned editorial, The Road Home, that opens with this statement:

It is time for the United States to leave Iraq, without any more delay than the Pentagon needs to organize an orderly exit.

No need to guess how they really feel about this one! First, they provide a laundry list of “bad” or “misguided” intentions, “badly planned” or “inept” actions and “bad” or just “badly reported?” outcomes which reads to this observer as weak attempts at righteous indignation — won’t the Left ever get over the 2000 election? Apparently not . . . But, even as the world cries out, especially those on the Left, for “something” to be done about the genocide happening in Darfur, the NYT comes clean and states that this same horror “might” happen in Iraq if we just up and leave.

Americans must be clear that Iraq, and the region around it, could be even bloodier and more chaotic after Americans leave. There could be reprisals against those who worked with American forces, further ethnic cleansing, even genocide. Potentially destabilizing refugee flows could hit Jordan and Syria. Iran and Turkey could be tempted to make power grabs. Perhaps most important, the invasion has created a new stronghold from which terrorist activity could proliferate.

Gee, that sounds like a laundry list that makes a powerful argument for us to stay. What possibly could this lil’ ol’ Okie be missin’? Is there some Yankee gene that I’m deficient in that would allow my comprehension of the aggregate, anonymous wisdom of the Gray Lady’s brain trust? Wait, here’s one of their “big” ideas for getting the various factions in Iraq to come-to-the-table and work out a compromise that will create stability in the country.

The administration should use whatever leverage it gains from withdrawing to press its allies and Iraq’s neighbors to help achieve a negotiated solution.

BWWWHHHHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!! Almost spit coffee all over the flat screen on that one! Let’s see if they have another side-splitter in there. Yep!

Congress and the White House must lead an international attempt at a negotiated outcome. To start, Washington must turn to the United Nations, which Mr. Bush spurned and ridiculed as a preface to war.

BWWWHHHHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!! BWWWHHHHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!

Yeah, let’s let this do-nothin’ Congress try and “lead” an international anything, let alone a “negotiated outcome” to this war in Iraq — these jokers only seem to be able to pass non-binding resolutions, and only a few of them to boot! Must be somethin’ really special in the water at the NYT.

Don Surber at Daily Mail also finds the NYT’s position . . . disturbing.

The chaos would result in zero civil liberties for 25 million Iraqis. The Times clamored for extraconstitutional rights for 500 or so jihadists at Gitmo — men captured on the battlefield. Now the Times is willing to forfeit any civil justice system at all in Iraq.

What the Times proposes may be over-the-top, but it should be remembered for the Times has abandoned its principles.

Its next call to spend more money on the environment will be framed with the reminder of how large a carbon footprint the Al-Qaida Car Bombing Brigade will leave in Iraq if we surrender immediately.

Its next call for equal pay for women will be framed with a reminder that the Times is willing to allow in Iraq for the stoning of raped women as punishment for “adultery.”

Its next call for more spending on education will be framed with the reminder that the Times is willing to allow students in Iraq to be blown up in their schools and to be forced to attend jihadist schools.

Its next call for “affordable housing” will be framed with the reminder that the Times is willing to allow for millions more to become refugees in Iraq as they flee the violence that will engulf that nation in the wake of a withdrawal of the U.S. troops.

Its next call for revamping Homeland Security will be framed with the reminder that the Times is willing to allow Iraq to resume its role as the chief exporter of terrorism to Israel.

Manhattan may be an island, but the United States is not. The national security rests on having a safe and secure world.

So, how would the Times suggest that we go about ensuring what Surber posits, and I agree, that we require for our national security, a “safe and secure world”? Their editorial ends with this challenge:

We can go on allowing Mr. Bush to drag out this war without end or purpose. Or we can insist that American troops are withdrawn as quickly and safely as we can manage — with as much effort as possible to stop the chaos from spreading.

“[W]ith as much effort as possible to stop the chaos from spreading.” Damn — that kinda sounds like what we’ve been doing over there these last four years!

So, yeah NYT, why not? Let’s beat it, get the hell out — so we can go right back in again — except that it will be even worse the next time!

That sounds about right, about nuanced enough for the east coast Liberals. Shoot, will probably play well out here, too. Nah, not “probably” — will play well out here. Notice that nowhere in the editorial is there any mention about the successes happening in Operation Arrowhead Ripper. Nowhere is there a mention about the atrocities that al Qaeda is already committing against the Iraqi people. Nowhere do they acknowledge that international terror ops appear to be coming from al Qaeda in Iraq even while we are still there . . . this first time.

Nope, it’s just all “cut & run” all the time at the NYT. You know — the purveyor of “All The News That’s Fit to Print.”

BWWWHHHHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!

This entry was posted on Sunday, July 8th, 2007 at 11:17 am and is filed under A Post 9/11 World, Fever Swamp Madness, Iraq War. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.  |   Print This Post  |   Email This Post

Recently Posted:

• Two More Pro-Global-Warming Scientists Become Sceptics — Is Hell Freezing Over Yet?
• Merry Christmas Y’All — 2011!
• Pearl Harbor Day — the USS Oklahoma — a Post Redux “x” Five
• More Climategate 2.0 Shenanigans . . . What Else Would We Expect?
• Concrete, Sustainability & The EPA — A Nasty, Expensive Mix — Oh, Ya Betcha!
• Climategate 2.0 Emails – Real & Spectacular?
• Chemtrail Of The Day
• Giving Thanks to Our Veterans On This Special Day
• Victor Davis Hanson On The Upcoming Presidential Election
• SEIU Siphons ‘Dues’ From Michigan Medicaid Payments