Hirsh continues to pass along the Bush propaganda that “the surge” is working in Iraq. Hirsh wants us to believe that the changes in military strategy were the primary factor in the lowering of deaths for the period. However, Hirsh can offer no proof of this, and he can make that claim only by downplaying the logic of the two other far more plausible explanations: the temporary cease-fire truce called by Moqtada al-Sadr and the effects of the bribery of the Sunni tribes called the “Anbar” success. Hirsh’s basis for claiming that the “surge” is working are claims like those from John McCain and Gen. Petraeus that they are able to walk around the markets now in a way that they couldn’t before. Of course this claim is made only for these men accompanied by many troops protecting them and there is no foundation to believe that they couldn’t have walked around before with the same protection. .
How can you tell that Hirsh is presenting propaganda in the manner of Fox’s “opinion journalism” rather than news? One example is when Hirsh refers to al-Sadr he calls him “the radical cleric al-Sadr.” There is no purpose to labeling al-Sadr as “the radical” other than to present the propaganda view. Al-Sadr could be called “the nationalist al-Sadr” with far more justification. The “anti-occupation al-Sadr” would be an un-opinionated label also. But the word “radical” is only used in the American context to undermine any legitimacy to al-Sadr.
Hirsch keeps droning on that “the surge has worked” but the only part of the surge that has worked is the surge in money used to bribe the Sunni tribes into stopping their attacks on the U.S. troops. We gave money and weapons to the Sunni tribes who will now use those weapons against their own government as soon as they get the opportunity. That is not “working” by any stretch.
Hirsh is wrong to say Obama was wrong about “the surge.” During the so-called “the surge” there have continued to be killings of U.S. troops, killing of civilians by U.S. troops, mass killings of Iraqis by factions, mosques attacked, etc. Simply having a modest reduction in deaths is not a success or “working” on the part of the phony “surge.”
Every indication that “the surge” is working is an illusion. The number of deaths since "the surge" are down from the high count in 2006 and the beginning of 2007, but the deaths are still as high as the death rates in 2003, 2004, and 2005. Tell the families of the 700 to 900 people killed per month that the “surge” is “working” because the death count wasn’t at the high points of 2000 to 3000 per month and are now back down to the rates of the first three years of the war. http://www.iraqbodycount.or
g/database/
http://www.iraqbodycount.or
g/analysis/beyond/enforced-
security/
Sadly, Cenk is reduced to ineffectual muttering in his conversation with Hirsh, apparently because he doesn’t want to have a head to head confrontation with Hirsch. When Cenk was talking to George Lakoff, they both strongly agreed that even the use of the term “surge” was bowing and capitulation to the Republican framing, but when Cenk is confronted by Hirsh using the term, Cenk too caves in, just like Obama on FISA, letting Hirsh go on about the “surge” working. I guess that Cenk feels that he can’t offend Hirsh by calling Hirsh on his use of Republican framing or Hirsh wouldn’t want to come back to TYT. That is sad and shows that even Rebels have their limits when dealing with the beltway bias.
posted by Gregory Wonderwheel 
