NYT: Something Has To Give

Belying the rightwing distortions of a "liberal media conspiracy", Greg Mitchell, editor of E&P, puts the N.Y. Times on the spot on Iraq:

What will it take, exactly, for The New York Times to declare on its editorial page that the United States should begin to bring to a close its adventure in Iraq? ...

Just yesterday came news of the murder of a Times reporter/photographer, Fakher Haider, in Iraq. Surely this is not reason enough for the U.S. to withdraw from Iraq--but look at the circumstances. Haider was apparently killed not by insurgents or terrorists or even run-of-the-mill Sunnis or Baathists, but by Shiite militia and police ostensibly aligned with “our” side. Freelance American journalist Steven Vincent died under the same circumstances in August.

These two killings took place in Basra, long described as one of the major success stories in Iraq. In today's edition, the Times said the city “has grown increasingly violent, with a complex web of sectarian agendas playing itself out almost daily on the streets.” Shiite militias, reporter Robert Worth noted, are even fighting British troops.

Just last week, the Times looked inside another “model” city, Najaf, and found similar or worse problems there, with reconstruction projects "hobbled by poor planning" and "corrupt contractors." Sure, these cities are relatively calmer than Baghdad, but is this reason enough to justify a never-ending U.S. presence? And what of all the new tales of rampant corruption or missing billions elsewhere in that land?

Then there's the cost of the Katrina catastrophe...

So: Will the Times declare that it is not just desirable, but imperative, that we start to end our hideously costly occupation of Iraq?

Every major poll, for quite some time now, has revealed that the majority of American people feel that 1) invading Iraq was a mistake 2) based on misleading information or lies and that 3) things are going poorly for the U.S. in Iraq because 4) President Bush is handling the war badly so 5) we should immediately begin withdrawing.

The Times editorial board surely agrees with points one through four--yet has not yet make the logical conclusion that is #5.