Sanchez Speaks, But You Didn't Get it all from the MSM

Sanchez was pretty brusque in his analysis of the Iraq war, and frankly he hasn't said anything that isn't justified. I'd also note that his statements pretty much fit most wars at some point.

SINCE THE START OF THIS WAR, AMERICA'S LEADERSHIP HAS KNOWN THAT OUR MILITARY ALONE COULD NOT ACHIEVE VICTORY IN IRAQ. STARTING IN JULY 2003, THE MESSAGE REPEATEDLY COMMUNICATED TO WASHINGTON BY MILITARY COMMANDERS ON THE GROUND WAS THAT THE MILITARY ALONE COULD NEVER ACHIEVE "VICTORY" IN IRAQ. OUR SOLDIERS, SAILORS, AIRMEN AND MARINES WERE DESTINED TO ENDURE DECADES OF FIGHTING AND KILLING PEOPLE WITHOUT THE FOCUSED, SYNCHRONIZED APPLICATION OF ALL ELEMENTS OF NATIONAL POWER. THIS WAS A NECESSARY CONDITION TO STABILIZE IRAQ. ANY SEQUENTIAL SOLUTIONS WOULD LEAD TO A PROLONGED CONFLICT AND INCREASED RESISTANCE.

BY NEGLECT AND INCOMPETENCE AT THE NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL LEVEL, THAT IS THE PATH OUR POLITICAL LEADERS CHOSE AND NOW AMERICA, MORE PRECISELY THE AMERICAN MILITARY, FINDS ITSELF IN AN INTRACTABLE SITUATION. CLEARLY, MISTAKES HAVE BEEN MADE BY THE AMERICAN MILITARY IN ITS APPLICATION OF POWER BUT EVEN ITS GREATEST FAILURES IN THIS WAR CAN BE LINKED TO AMERICA'S LACK OF COMMITMENT, PRIORITY AND MORAL COURAGE IN THIS WAR EFFORT. WITHOUT THE SACRIFICES OF OUR MAGNIFICENT YOUNG MEN AND WOMEN IN UNIFORM, IRAQ WOULD BE CHAOTIC WELL BEYOND ANYTHING EXPERIENCED TO DATE.

Then he points out what I think is obvious, but the press seems to not want to dwell on.

AMERICA HAS NO CHOICE BUT TO CONTINUE OUR EFFORTS IN IRAQ. A PRECIPITOUS WITHDRAWAL WILL UNQUESTIONABLY LEAD TO CHAOS THAT WOULD ENDANGER THE STABILITY OF THE GREATER MIDDLE EAST. IF THIS OCCURS IT WOULD HAVE SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE EFFECTS ON THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY. COALITION AND AMERICAN FORCE PRESENCE WILL BE REQUIRED AT SOME LEVEL FOR THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE. GIVEN THE LACK OF A GRAND STRATEGY WE MUST MOVE RAPIDLY TO MINIMIZE THAT FORCE PRESENCE AND ALLOW THE IRAQIS MAXIMUM ABILITY TO EXERCISE THEIR SOVERIEGNTY IN ACHIEVING A SOLUTION.

AT NO TIME IN AMERICA'S HISTORY HAS THERE BEEN A GREATER NEED FOR BIPARTISAN COOPERATION. THE THREAT OF EXTREMISM IS REAL AND DEMANDS UNIFIED ACTION AT THE SAME LEVELS DEMONSTRATED BY OUR FOREFATHERS DURING WORLD WAR I AND WORLD WAR II. AMERICA HAS FAILED TO DATE.

His analysis statements regarding the partisan squabbling and complete failure to focus on the end game is for the most part minimized in reporting that I've seen.

The most humorous thing is what many blogs are starting to point out. The MSM completely ignores the start of his speech. Here he takes the MSM to task for irresponsible reporting and accelerating minor problems into conflagrations. Captain Ed at Captain's Quarters discusses this point pretty well.

Given that, it seems highly ironic that the journalists covering the story attempted to cover up the acidic, biting, and mostly accurate criticisms of their own performance in this war while giving front-page treatment to Sanchez' criticisms of the political structure at the same time. If Sanchez has such credibility and standing to bring this kind of criticism to bear on Washington, why didn't the Post and other news agencies give the same level of exposure to his media criticisms as well? He basically accuses them of cynically selling out the soldiers to defeat American efforts to win the war, and made sure that those accusations came first before his assessment of the political failures, but you'd never know that from the Post.

The Post then goes on to obfuscate a key part of the second half of Sanchez' speech. While he criticizes the Bush administration in sharp terms, Sanchez blames the Democrats in equal measure. He calls out partisans on all sides for exploiting the war for their own political benefit rather than the good of the nation, and blames the lack of range for strategic options on the corrosive debate that has hamstrung the range of choices.

I'm not particularly surprised that we didn't hear any of his criticism of the MSM. Why would you reasonably expect that to be reported from a group that can't report responsibly on any topic from the start. I'd say the discussion was never meant to be because it would make it clear to the public that the MSM is in fact biased and is causing more harm than good in our efforts in Iraq. They do more to propagate the insurgent's cause than our own.

Other decent commentary can be seen at the Belmont Club and Small Wars Journal.

To take this a step further checkout this National Review piece by Jonathan Foreman on fixers in Iraq.

That this journalist--otherwise honest and relatively unbiased--relied entirely on Sunni Arabs is bad enough. For a journalist to rely on Iraqis with such backgrounds is arguably like going to Germany in 1945 and hiring a former employee of Josef Goebbels as your fixer and a recently retired SS officer as your translator. Yet it had never occurred to my colleague that his choices were problematic, or that his employees might have an agenda of their own.

A bit inflammatory, but none the less accurate. The saddest part of all of this is that there is no one holding the MSM responsible. The average American merely swallows the MSM's point of view without question. I'd say that the EU population probably follows suit and the press in the middle-east passes it along as proof of US irresponsibility.

With the likes of Media Matters out there ensuring to defend the liberal side of press intelligence against conservative criticism it is no wonder that the MSM continuously views itself vindicated in its irresponsible actions. A group like Media matters would have more clout if they did more to balance their stance and look for bias on all sides of the MSM, but that isn't their purpose and thus deserves to be written off for the most part. They have a part to play in reporting flawed reporting, but since the focus is solely on the conservative point of view, it really comes across as hypocritical. No doubt the same attributions can be said for NewsBusters and others analyzing the liberal bent of the MSM.

One must wonder where the fourth estate will be taking us in the future. For most certainly, the MSM of today is far from responsible and far from neutral observers.