This is certainly not a good thing for Reuters. They, along with the rest of the MSM, have been looking for someone to take over the reins from Jimmy Carter for the last 27 years....
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - With an intensifying White House race drawing attention to his legacy, President George W. Bush could leave office without the baggage of complete failure in Iraq thanks to new U.S. military gains, some analysts say.
American success at quelling sectarian and insurgent violence has raised hopes that the relatively calmer conditions of the past few months in Iraq might last into early 2009, when the next U.S. president takes over.
"The overall prediction has to be that George Bush will escape this without an obviously visible abject failure. It may become that again over time. But right now, it looks like Bush will escape by the skin of his teeth," said Michael O'Hanlon of the Brookings Institution.
O'Hanlon is not alone in expectations for Bush to achieve a grim victory by avoiding the worst of Iraq legacies.
"The Bush administration has managed to basically gain enough time to come to the end of the administration without any serious deterioration in Iraq," said Joost Hiltermann, a long-time critic of Bush policy in Iraq at the Brussels-based International Crisis Group.
"He's bought himself enough time to sit out his presidency: applause. Bush won in that sense," Hiltermann added.
ZIP
Bookmark Weasel Zippers click HERE, then press CTRL+D
I can practically hear the disappointment.
Posted by: JorgXMcKie | November 17, 2007 at 10:29 PM
Conversely, I've got a sawbuck that says Reuters, in particular (and the MSM in general) will be historically judged a total failure in its coverage of both the war in Iraq and the GWOT. There will be no "grim victory" for these fools; thanks in no small part to the rise of the alternative media, dinosaurs like Reuters may not even be around 10 years from now.
Anybody care to wager I'll be wrong?
Posted by: MarkJ | November 17, 2007 at 10:43 PM
What in the hell is a "grim victory"?
* rolls eyes, walks away *
Posted by: Asher Abrams | November 17, 2007 at 10:45 PM
What in the hell is a "grim victory"?
Reuters slang for, "fuck, America won"
Posted by: ZIP | November 17, 2007 at 10:50 PM
Mark J "Anybody care to wager I'll be wrong?"
No.
Posted by: JDAM | November 17, 2007 at 10:51 PM
I find it interesting that O'Hanlon, a fellow who I consider worth listening to if not always agreeing with, appears in the media frequently as a Brookings fellow. By the way, he also was recently hired by the Hillary Clinton campaign.
I also find it interesting that this latter fact is not in the Reuters piece...
Posted by: Chap | November 17, 2007 at 11:34 PM
As a Middle Eastern myself, I agree.
I love the idea that, for once, an American president did NOT side with a dictator and it took so much backbone for Bush to do act against Saddam. Ask any Kurds in Iraq or any Afghani woman, and you will see that how ever you cut it, Bush's legacy will be extraordinary. Like it or not, he caused two democracy, however fragile, to emerge in the Middle East and we love him for that.
Eat you hear out, Liberals..!!!
Posted by: Frieda | November 18, 2007 at 01:17 AM
I'll take it a step further:
Through the lens of time it will be noted that Bush changed the course of world history.
Under Bush the UN has become less relevent.
Eastern European states more relevent.
Free trade more promiscuous.
North Korea brought to heel.
Fledgling democracy in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Libya gave up its nuclear ambitions.
Kyoto accord - done.
ABM treaty - done.
Posted by: lonetown | November 18, 2007 at 07:15 AM
Frieda said: "As a Middle Eastern myself, I agree...... "
Nice to read stuff like this from Middle eastern people....really nice.
Posted by: sheepdog | November 18, 2007 at 07:15 AM
Who will be the MSM 'Gorbachev' I wonder?
The leader that the Nobel committle will award the peace prize to in 10 years, so Bush doesn't any credit?
Posted by: mark | November 18, 2007 at 08:36 AM
Not 'an obviously visible abject failure?' Grudging with a capital G.
Posted by: Achillea | November 18, 2007 at 11:45 AM
Thisa is like a superbowl post-game headline...
"Patriots fail to lose the superbowl"
Posted by: mark | November 18, 2007 at 12:25 PM
Dear Mark J: I'll take your bet. You have left yourself open with the phrase:
"...Reuters, in particular (and the MSM in general) will be historically judged a total failure in its coverage of both the war in Iraq and the GWOT."
In whose historical judgment? The MSM's? Academia? To be sure, there are minority views within each of these groups, but minority is what they are, and what they will be. Shucks, the New York TIMES can't even bring itself to say what a liar and fool Walter Duranty was in the 1930s "reporting" now, seventy years on. Has CBS ever questioned Walter Cronkhite's Tet pronouncements? Again, the S&G song says it well, the "Sounds of Silence." Too, despite the fast decline of the MSM, there's plenty of money left in the corporate net worth, and being on the left means never ever having to say "I was wrong." So they will lie for years to come, awarding themselves the highest prizes for doing so, keeping the historical picture clouded. I will cover your sawbuck, and should I win, stand you a round of your choice in honor of your sound judgment now.
Sincerely yours,
Gregory Koster
Posted by: Gregory Koster | November 18, 2007 at 02:01 PM
I think this should be viewed as "Damned by faint praise". Just more ducks pecking away, another left handed complement if you will. To the folks at Reuters, this article is like lipstick on a pig.
JWF3
Posted by: | November 18, 2007 at 04:26 PM
Imagine his legacy if the DemQaeda candidate isn't elected?
Posted by: bandit | November 19, 2007 at 07:33 AM
No matter how you look at it, Bush was and is the worse president ever to walk through the doors of the Whitehouse. He's broke this country on so many levels , it's rediculous. Yes he might have been the cause of liberating Iraq from the worse thing since Hitler, but, who is he to do so, they didn't want their liberation (or this war (police action) wouldn't have last this long,nor would they be fighting to kick us out of their country), they were content under the reigns of that maniac. Our porpose was to go after Bin laden (which we've never caught)not Hussien (that was just a personal vendetta he wanted to settle, which was his plan before he ever made presindecy). He basically bankrupt Texas as Govenor, and he's done the samething to this country. In most people's eyes I know he's no different than Hitler, Bin laden, Stalin or Hussien. And because most don't agree with what that bozo in office has done, we are called liberals. I call it tired of screwing over Americans and putting them in the poor house because he wanted to show daddy he can do what he did and do it better. Hey Bush, look at the problems in this country. Don't you think we need help here bailing ourselves out of what you helped put us into? Help your own countymen before screwing with others
Posted by: wdw3264 | July 21, 2008 at 04:45 PM
Tell us how you really feel. At least he isnt screwing you over by refusing to tap ready energy sources like Pelosi and her ilk. Now they want to raise the gasoline tax. Make you feel good WDW?
Posted by: Elric66 | July 21, 2008 at 05:10 PM
Tell us how you really feel. At least he isnt screwing you over by refusing to tap ready energy sources like Pelosi and her ilk. Now they want to raise the gasoline tax. Make you feel good WDW?
Posted by: Elric66 | July 21, 2008 at 05:11 PM
Dude, he could have pulled a Jimmy Carter years ago, when the oil companies tried this in the 70's, with their so called oil shortage. Carter stepped in and put a freeze on it and put them at bay. What has Bush done for us? besides cower down to them. I stand by what I said, THE WORSE PRESIDENT EVER TO WALK TROUGH THE WHITEHOUSE DOORS.
Posted by: wdw3264 | July 21, 2008 at 05:24 PM
The same Dhimmi Carter that said we would have run out of oil by the 90's? Please. So you must be one of the ones that are ok with rising gas prices because in 15 years we will have some miracle fuel. Do I have that right?
Posted by: Elric66 | July 21, 2008 at 05:27 PM
wdw,
You are just not correct. OPEC created the early 70's ' shortage' not American oil companies.
There has not been another attack in America since 2001. President Bush has done a pretty good job considering the twits and ego maniacs he has to work with everyday along with thier DUMB ASS supporters.
carter did nothng but fuck things up and continues to do so. His screw ups will be around for a loooong time. I think it was divine intervention that a group of little old jewish women who can find a 5 cent mistake of a 10 person lunch check couldn't use a ballot system that no one else in the nation had any trouble with. Had gore been in power, he would of surrendgored Sept 12, 2001.
Posted by: Dark Helmet | July 21, 2008 at 05:36 PM
Elric66, what part of freezing didn't you understand? Bush could have helped us years ago by imposing a freeze, but he did'nt. Again he's done nothing, but, to help hurt this country. So, where do you get being ok with rising gas prices? rising gas prices = rising cost of everything but our wages = poor economy = hurting this country = hurting hard working americans = worse president ever. Get it?
Posted by: wdw3264 | July 21, 2008 at 05:46 PM
Elricc,
Never try to teach a pig to sing, it wastes your time and annoys the hell out of the pig. This is the same clinton can do no wrong bullshit that just about ruined the country.
Posted by: Dark Helmet | July 21, 2008 at 05:52 PM
ok enough said, I'll quit trying to teach you to sing then, since it annoy's you. have a good one I'm out
Posted by: wdw3264 | July 21, 2008 at 05:57 PM
I wish you could teach me to sing WDW, I can't carry a tune in a bucket that already has the lid on it.
But you are not going to teach anyone anything by pontificating bullshit. Think for yourself beyond your own comfort zone & you might just start singing a different tune. Have a great one.
Posted by: Dark Helmet | July 21, 2008 at 06:02 PM