U.S. Case for Helping Iraq Suffers a Setback

BAGHDAD, Iraq, Oct. 26 — In purely military terms, the rocket attack Sunday morning on a hotel being used by Paul D. Wolfowitz, the deputy secretary of defense and a leading architect of the war against Saddam Hussein, meant little.

But the strike is a serious setback for the Bush administration as it tries to persuade the world to focus on the positives of the American occupation, on falling crime and new schools, on cleaner streets and freer speech.

Instead, it is a reminder that after easily toppling Mr. Hussein, the United States is struggling against a continuing guerrilla resistance, and struggling even though the guerrillas are badly trained and ill equipped.

But the guerrillas have two great advantages. First, the United States has been reluctant to use its full might against them, for fear of turning civilians against the occupation and inflaming public opinion worldwide.

Second, the guerrillas can win merely by creating chaos. As long as they are killing soldiers and Iraqi civilians, the Bush administration will have a difficult time convincing Americans that Iraq is becoming more stable — and in winning the foreign investment that Iraq's economy needs.

more…
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/27/international/worldspecial/27ASSE.html?hp

in stating the obvious....

in telling DUers something they have known since before Congress absentmindedly handed Dubya a blank check to go to war....

...aaahhh...we get too soon old and too late smart......

Rightist loons have been pushing that for a while.

Saying "move along, everything's fine, why? cuz the president sex so!"

bombed to bits); please also define 'falling crime rates', I would be fascinated to know on what data that statement is based; clean streets? OK, so we have picked up all of the unexploded ordnance that WE dumped on Iraq? Now, that's real progress! Does anyone have any pictures of Iraqi cities prior to the invasion? That might be a real eye=opener for the lurking freepers here!:mad:

The attack on the Bagdad hotel wasn't militarily significant?

<There are many Iraqis whose confidence can make a real difference in the immediate future — like entrepreneurs considering new investments, wealthy merchants wondering whether to keep their families here and ordinary Iraqis wondering whether they can safely enter political life. For them, the American military's inability to assure the safety of one of its most senior officials is a frightening sign.>

A frightening sign? It is the acid test. It has always been the acid test in Bagdad. Civil war is not conducive to commerce. Polls already show that the population wants the occupation forces out now. Community leaders told the occupation forces that if they couldn't restore order within six months, they would fail. Guess what?