"ARE WE THERE YET?"

An excellent article on the nature of rebuilding a war-torn nation. Do yourself a favor and read the whole thing.

Reading this history makes clear that the recent French demand that the Americans “turn Iraq back to the Iraqis in a month” is brass-plated hypocrisy of the highest order. But it also demonstrates that questions from the American reporters whether the job in Iraq is almost completed, or might be completed in a year or so, is akin to fractious children in the back seat on a long-distance trip, querulously repeating “Are we there yet?”

As I said to the American press in my prior column, ''Do your d*mned homework.'' Now that I've done that homework from a farmhouse on a mountain at the end of a half-mile gravel road, I add this comment to the American press: ''You have the nerve to call yourselves reporters?'' The effort was easy. And the conclusions are obvious...

A fair reading of the history of the American occupation of Germany leads to the conclusion that America is about two years ahead of the pace of achievement, month by month, in Iraq as compared to Germany. Of course there is the minor distinction that the American media, led by the New York Times, were not snapping at the heels of General Eisenhower and his staff and soldiers as they carried out their mission in 1945-46. (The only criticisms by the American press concerned limited de-Nazification, not the ''failure'' of the entire mission.) Nor were there packs of candidates of the opposing party, then the Republicans, attacking President Truman for his ''failure'' in Germany as they campaigned for the presidential election of 1948.

In short, the major drawbacks to the American occupation in Iraq are not in Iraq. Compared to the one close example, Germany, the major defects of the Iraqi occupation are only in the pages of the American press and in the stump speeches of assorted badly-informed American candidates for President.