So I'm still waiting for someone to explain to me how the following two arguments can both be true:
(a) security conditions inside of Iraq today are far better than the media portrays; the number of deaths is less than in (fill in name of major American city here), and life is getting back to normal
(b) security conditions inside of Iraq today are so dangerous that holding elections will be impossible in the near future.
This seems to be the official administration line right now, and I'm puzzled as to how its supporters reconcile these two contradictory positions (and why they've been allowed to get away with it, but that's a different set of issues).
Just curious.
Comments