Dennis Byrne's Fifth Annual "Iraq Is Getting Better" Column

Progress Illinois — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 11:35:27 -0700

Today's Tribune column from Dennis Byrne features another doozy of a thesis: the Iraq war will soon end in an American "victory":

[Barack Obama], his fans and much of the media haven't noticed in the heat of the presidential campaign, but the war is winding down, if not nearing its end. Fewer military and civilians killed or wounded; fewer insurgent attacks; more order and security, especially in such troubled areas as Basra and Sadr City; more reconciliation; improved quality of life, and—not the least—greater liberties.

Byrne is correct to say that violence in Iraq is down at the moment among both American troops and Iraqi civilians, an undeniably positive development. But as General David Petraeus himself said just a few short months ago, "no one" in the U.S. and Iraqi governments "feels that there has been sufficient progress by any means in the area of national reconciliation," (the stated goal of the surge) or in the provision of basic public services. And many believe Iraq's relative peace could fracture at any moment:

“Compare the situation now to six months or a year ago, and it is much better now,” said Nabil Younis, a political scientist at Baghdad University. “But most people feel the progress is not real progress. They expect something to happen any day, any hour, any minute … and everything will collapse.”

The thrust of Byrne's latest piece is far from surprising. A review of his Tribune columns over the last five years reveals that he has consistently pointed to temporary developments -- from marginal gains in security to various elections -- as evidence that the United States is making tangible progress in Iraq. Meanwhile, during the same time period, an increasing number of soldiers and civilians have died and the country has slipped further into chaos.

Below are a few choice excerpts from Byrne on Iraq.

April 9, 2007, "And now, good news from Iraq":

Iraqi coalition forces have shut down a major network of car bombers that was responsible for the deaths of at least 650 civilians.

Its eradication, along with the elimination of another terrorist network and three car-bomb factories, is the latest positive news coming out of Iraq.

Gen. David Petraeus, commander of U.S. forces there, also reported the recent capture of "more than the usual numbers" of weapons caches. One consisted of more than 120 improvised explosive devices, some of which were the "particularly lethal" anti-armor munitions being used against U.S. troops.

Perhaps you're wondering what a straight news story is doing here, in a commentary section. It's because there doesn't seem to be enough room in the media's straight news sections to report positive developments in the Iraq war.

April 17, 2006, "Fighting over power: When conflicting civilizations collide":

Speaking of Iraq, some readers, in response to my April 3 column, explained that good news from Iraq isn't reported because there's no good news to report. None. Period. So, in response to their challenge to come up with some, I give you the liberal Brookings Institution and its "Iraq Index." [...]

I won't try to characterize the report one way or another, except to say that those blind to any good news will be surprised.

November 28, 2005, "To all you naysayers; Iraq is on its way to becoming a democracy":

The point? The heroic Iraqi citizens have traveled a more dangerous road toward democracy more rapidly then anyone ever expected, making that another part of the "failed war plan," I assume. Can we agree that it's great for Iraq, the Middle East and for us? Or perhaps you can't share this enthusiasm because you hate the Bushies so much that a part of you hopes the elections fail.

September 27, 2004, "Can we undo the damage of doves?":

We couldn't win the war in Iraq either. Remember how the supply lines were too long? Or how we were sure to fail if Turkey didn't allow U.S. combat troops to cross its soil to get to Iraq? Again, wrong.

As Iraqi interim Prime Minister Ayad Allawi reminded critics in his visit to the United States last week: The doves said a new Iraqi constitution could never be approved this year. Wrong.

They said the "hand-over" of authority to an interim Iraqi government could never be accomplished by the end of June. Wrong.

They said the cacophony of ethnic groups and fractious Muslims never could create a National Council. Wrong.

Now they say that elections cannot possibly be held next January. Almost as if they hope it will be so.

An interesting sidenote: in a March 31, 2003, column defending the recent Iraq invasion, Byrne lamented that President Bush is "given no credit for winning" the war in Afghanistan. But a sweep of his Tribune writings in the five years since found no acknowledgment from Byrne of that country's downward spiral. Indeed, security reports now show that Afghanistan -- the site of Bush's purported "victory" -- is now a country in crisis.

Maybe if the situation in Iraq worsens yet again, Byrne can just stop writing about it.

Byrne And Kass Worry Aloud About Obama's Illinois Ties

Adam Doster — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 10:22:12 -0700

By calling 70 percent of Americans "get-out-of-Iraq-right-now zealots," Dennis Byrne's column in the Tribune today starts off on the wrong foot. Unfortunately for him, it doesn't really recover. Here's the thesis:

But if Obama's affiliations with the likes of Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr., Rev. Michael Pfleger and ex-revolutionary Bill Ayers are legitimate issues, so is his political apprenticeship in the bowels of a political process that has sent governors, aldermen and countless other public officials to the pen. Has Obama picked up any bad habits by hanging around with these gents? Is he susceptible to the pressures that the "guys back home" will undoubtedly bring? The conventional wisdom among the Chicago punditry is that Chicago and Illinois pols are smacking their lips at the thought of installing an associate in the Executive Mansion.

As Dan Johnson-Weinberger noted, the Tribune's John Kass raised similar concerns yesterday in a column subtly titled "Obama's mettle was forged in city's dubious furnace":

These days, with vague Orwellian slogans like "change" and polling and a national media obviously in thrall with him, there seems to be an effort to ignore Obama's Chicago political connections, to consider him as having been hatched, perhaps immaculately from a floating soap bubble, spotless and clean to the world.

But Chicago was where he was boiled down and honed, where the community organizer was rendered, where the politically independent junior senator began cozying up to the Daleys and their machine and the new presidential Barack was formed.

Both of these columns are heavy on one thing (insinuation) and light on another (evidence). Neither Byrne nor Kass give any legitimate support for their contention that Obama is stained by the Illinois political scene. The only specific issue they raise is Obama's relationship with Tony Rezko. But of course, they don't offer any evidence that Obama was improperly influenced by the now-convicted fundraiser.

So rather than simply wonder about what Obama may do as president, let's take a look at what he's done. Obama emerged from the doldrums of Chicago and Springfield as a true clean elections reformer, not a politician beholden to his party bosses. And as Johnson-Weinberger pointed out, Obama has furthered this record during his time in Washington. There's little reason to believe he'd let any dirty players "slip through the back door" now.

If Byrne and Kass are so worried about connected associates, perhaps they should shift their focus over to McCain's economic advisers. They may know a thing or two about backroom deals.