Quote:
Originally Posted by firstdown
Funny how it seems that the New York Times will go out of its way to do anything to make this administration look bad. Every other report I have seen has things getting better but it can always be better. I'm sure if I was a merchant that has been involved in attacks it will take a long time to ever feel safe again. To make an issue because of his security is stupid because if he is seen he becomes a very very high target for insurgents so it has to be done. Just look at how we protect a president here in our own country.
|
I'm not sure I see your point. It seems like only yesterday that the Times was going out of its way to hype the administration's case for war on it's front pages, while burying articles skeptical of WMD claims at the back of the paper. But that notwithstanding, McCain's point in this specific instance is idiotic. There are not areas in Baghdad in which western politicians can safely walk. That is something that is contradicted by a more than the NYTimes, including most recently and most specifically by retired four star general Barry McCaffrey who said: "[N]o Iraqi government official, coalition soldier, diplomat, reporter, foreign NGO [nongovernmental organization], nor contractor can walk the streets of Baghdad, nor Mosul, nor Kirkuk, nor Basra, nor Tikrit, nor Najaf, nor Ramadi, without heavily armed protection." Source,
McCaffrey Paints Gloomy Picture of Iraq - washingtonpost.com
Moreover, if you are suggesting that somehow these merchants don't understand the situation completely (and I'm not sure that you are, I am just trying to understand your point) that would be a tad bit patronizing.