http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24007825/#storyContinued
The head commander in Iraq, Army General David Petraeus, told the press on Tuesday, April 8, 2008, that it is impossible to promise any troop pullouts after this summer due to the delicately of the situation in the war zone. This testimony by Petraeus was coerced by questions from major presidential candidates and senators. While the security in Iraq is getting better and Iraq’s forces are gaining strength, Iraq is still unstable and cannot support itself, according to Petraeus, because of the threat of resurgence by Sunni/ Shiite extremist violence. After many senators questioned why so many American troops were still in Iraq and that Iraq will not stabilize until American troops withdraw and the Iraq’s can settle their differences, Petraeus did not answer their question, but retorted that he had recommended to President Bush that he should withdraw the 20,000 extra troops by July, and then start a 45-day period of “consolidation and evaluation” of Iraq before any other measures are taken in Iraq.
While the article’s basic purpose is to inform the reader of what is happening in the war in Iraq, the author’s overtone seems to be supportive of the General’s decision, and anti-democratic (the party). This feeling is expressed when the author using the phrase “impatient Democrats” and “parade of Democrats” when referring to who was questioning Petraesus’ decisions. There are plenty of republicans (at least now) that want our troops to be pulled out of Iraq and by saying it in only the Democrats makes the author seem biased and ignorant. While there could have been an actual “parade of democrats” this is a rather sarcastic way of saying that democratic senators were questioning him and gives democrats a kind of forceful overtone.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Good analysis. I read the article too and got the same vibe, which kind of makes the article hard to respect and take seriously with the undertone the author uses. I agree with all the stuff you said and your summary did a good job of summarizing (surprise suprise) the article. Once I read the article, I read your summary and analysis and I could have just read your summary.
This is funny because I had an article about the same thing, only it was focused more towards supporting the Democratic viewpoint. Anyways, I think your analysis is pretty good, I think your summery is accurate and it's funny that your article is the same story as mine, but given from a different viewpoint.
Post a Comment