SOB tries in vain on a daily basis to find any real "news" about what is going on in Iraq. The reports coming out of that unfortunate country continue to be a strange combination of fantasy and wishful thinking totally divorced from reality. We know we can discount virtually everything said officially by our military spokespersons - all of it has been proven over time to be in error, either deliberately untrue or terribly off the mark guesses.
Today, in a typically unedifying story entitled "U.S. Marine killed in Ramadi: Separately, 5 Iraqis die in car bomb blast"
MSNBC concludes with this sentence that says so much about our disconnect with reality in Iraq:
Insurgents fighting to overthrow Iraq’s U.S.-backed government frequently target Iraqi police and soldiers.
Where to start? First, the term "inusrgents" as used in this sentence - and this is typical of stories about Iraq - is used incorrectly.
Merriam-Webster's dictionary defines "INSURGENT" as "a person who revolts against civil authority or an established government". There is neither civil authority nor an "established government" in Iraq. Thus, the second part of the sentence that refers to attempts to "overthrow Iraq's U.S. backed government" is total wishful thinking. The U.S. has tried - and failed - to create a government that our military occupation could hide behind but all we have done is provide for an election of disconnected individuals who can't even agree on how to begin the process of creating a government. There is no constitution - hence no governmental structure of any kind. Iraq is still under the authority of rules promulgated by Paul Bremer as head of the CPA (Coalition Provisional Authority) - a totally bogus entity put forward as a "civilian" interface between the U.S. military and the hoped for tame Iraqi front. Their banking rules, tax rates, business law and even traffic regulations were imposed by an occupying power with no input from any Iraqi, and those rules will be in force until Iraq has the prower to overturn them (and that isn't likely to happen as long as our military is occupying the country).
Until reporters start addressing the reality on the ground in terms that don't embrace the PR fantasy of a "soverign" self-governing Iraq beset by bad-guys who want to overthrow the good-guys, no news stories about what is happening there will make any sense. The
Weekend Australian has a story that at least tries to address what is really happening:
Although the "good news" blogs that compile instances of Iraq's progress tend to present an over-rosy picture, the consistent progress being achieved on the ground, away from the headlines, highlights one of the stranger truths about post-Saddam Iraq: the country has devolved into a set of local fiefs, each effectively administering itself. . .
Like all Arab societies, it functions best at the level of the individual street or neighbourhood, where Islamic injunctions to help fellow Muslims have real force.
Despite the destructive effects of the Baathist system, and the overwhelming chaos caused by the US invasion and the political transformations attempted in the 24 months since US troops rolled into Baghdad, Iraq remains a network of small, "high social capital" communities, well able to run itself without central leadership.
Our own press seems incapable of any nuanced reporting about Iraq, preferring to stick with whatever the official U.S. government line is and quoting without context whatever government figure is the speaker of the day.