MSM Defeat Narrative Foundering on the Shoals of Truth?

With a pair of Brookings analysts—hardly known as Bush supporters—suggesting that the "surge" strategy might be going very well indeed, the left wingnut Defeat-In-Iraq narrative appears to be foundering as it hits the sharp reef of Truth. The Brookings assessment appears in no less than that Marxist Bible, the New York Times. The analysis is provocatively entitled, "A War We Just Might Win." It's evidence, perhaps, that this weakening media giant may at last be prepared to confront the real reason it's been steadily losing circulation. Mainly, that you can buy more professionally written fiction just down the street at your local Barnes & Noble.

The wingnuts' cheerleaders in the MSM may have some additional 'splainin' to do when their readers step up to the plate to challenge the anti-surge propaganda they've been putting out since early this year. Before the surge even got underway.

Tigerhawk has a pretty good analysis today as to what's been going on lately:

It has begun to dawn on even lefties with a couple of brain cells to rub together that we ain't fighting Iraq here. That war is over. We won. Saddam ain't the winner if we leave. He and the Baathists are dead. We are allied with "Iraq" in a fight against Salafist Al Qaeda. We had to figure out how to create our ally -- literally recreate Iraq -- and General Petraeus seems to have figured out how to do that. And furthermore, that ally has in turn figured out that in Petraeus and his strategy, Iraq has a capable friend in the US.

What a concept! As we've been preaching in HazZzMat since setting this site up in late 2005, we need to seize objective reporting and analysis back from the lefty propagandists in the media who've been pushing our "defeat" since 9/11. Tiger lays out the irreducible truth right here: We already won the war against Saddam's dictatorship. We've been, however, in a new war ever since, fighting the Al Qaeda Islamofascists in their own neck of the woods rather than on Broadway.

The left isn't interested in this distinction at all, since the aging Boomers at its head seem bent on re-creating another Vietnam-style "defeat" for us as their final dubious act of crowning generational glory. Now, however, it looks like their pre-cooked narrative is being overtaken by boots on the ground.

We might as well give Tiger the last word here:

Any war we choose to fight, and demonstrate the political will to see to its conclusion, we will win. Nobody should be surprised by this. We may not get every answer right - let's remember that General Pershing showed up in wool for the summer of 1917, we went to North Africa and Italy before Normandy, and Lincoln went through a bunch of losers before he found Grant -- but we get the big ones right.

Separately, it should not be lost on anybody that with Musharraf getting a bit more aggressive in Waziristan and Petraeus banging AQ pretty hard in Baghdad, we have an unusually good offensive going right now. Too bad it doesn't seem to get reported that way. And the only answer the enemy has is kidnapping people and carbombs. Just keep squeezing please. Harder.