Heading for Trouble Do we really want to occupy Iraq for the next 30 years? by James Webb - Washington Post September 4, 2002 (six months BEFORE we invaded Iraq).

Meanwhile, American military leaders have been trying to bring a wider focus to the band of neoconservatives that began beating the war drums on Iraq before the dust had even settled on the World Trade Center.  Despite the efforts of the neocons to shut them up or to dismiss them as unqualified to deal in policy issues, these leaders, both active-duty and retired, have been nearly unanimous in their concerns.  Is there an absolutely vital national interest that should lead us from containment to unilateral war and a long-term occupation of Iraq? And would such a war and its aftermath actually increase our ability to win the war against international terrorism?

In Japan, American occupation forces quickly became 50,000 friends.  In Iraq, they would quickly become 50,000 terrorist targets.

These are the same people that forgot to mention that Allen only had fifty people show up for that rally with McCain in Norfolk.  The Pilot has been dropping the ball A LOT recently.

I sent emails to the two reporters. Hopefully there will be enough public reaction to encourage them to be more careful in their reporting. This is the message I sent:

Dear Mr. Eisman (and to Mr. Fiske as well),
George Allen uses lies and smear tactics as a campaign strategy. Please do not let yourself be used again by this unprincipled politician.

The main thrust was that it is always disappointing when two otherwise good reporters fail to do a thorough job of reporting... and then told the editors the facts. What is it with modern day reporters? Are they lazy, or intimidated? They all too often simply repeat republican talking points without any effort to get "the rest of the story." We must constantly nag them to do their job, it seems.