The New York Times, paper of record in the US, published an editorial in the Opinion Section of its Sunday edition calling for the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq.
It wrote:It is time for the United States to leave Iraq, without any more delay than the Pentagon needs to organize an orderly exit.
I don't want to slam the Times for being late to the party on this, because I was as well. As the Times put it:...we have put off that conclusion, waiting for a sign that President Bush was seriously trying to dig the United States out of the disaster he created... we believed that after destroying Iraq’s government, army, police and economic structures, the United States was obliged to try to accomplish some of the goals Mr. Bush claimed to be pursuing, chiefly building a stable, unified Iraq. When it became clear that the president had neither the vision nor the means to do that, we argued against setting a withdrawal date while there was still some chance to mitigate the chaos that would most likely follow.
Because I agreed with that sentiment I figured it would be unfair for me to criticize the Times. But then I remembered, they're the The NY Times and supposed to be smarter and more savvy than me and everyone else.
With that, here are more headlines from this Sunday's Opinion Section:
In Superbowl XLI, smart money on Colts
For good of Country, President Nixon should resign
For good of Career, during Oprah interview, Tom Cruise should sit quietly
Jackson 5 Lead Singer headed down creepy, creepy road
Message to Dean: Avoid Weird Shrieks
Britney Spears won't look hot much longer
Times warns Kennedy: Don't campaign in Dallas
Iraq Invasion probably bad idea
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/08/opinion/08sun1.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
1 comment:
I take the NY TImes Op-Ed as seriously as the tabloids. I generally read the headlines and move on, b/c that's all you need to read to know what's in there.
Post a Comment