Anyone describing Iraqi police as "Janus faced" sounds like a journalism major - not an Army specialist or a staff sgt. The rest of the piece reads equally bogus. Elegant media words composed for some disgruntled soldiers to endorse. A guy shot in the head on August 12, expected to live doesn't compose pieces to the NYT by August 19th.

All this should be fairly obvious to folks who are even just somewhat observant.

But hey, say they wrote every word. It still, to me, is hovering just slightly over meaningless.

To be blunt, I'm already tired of explaining the whys and wherefores of who wants us out of Iraq and why. Believe it, don't believe it - I don't really care. What 7 soldiers think about middle-eastern policy in Iraq is about as relevant to me as what 7 traffic cops say about combatting organized crime.

A lot of folks here are, to put it somewhat kindly, not exactly krypton bulbs when it comes to global affairs and are surrender monkeys or easily influenced by surrender monkeys whose greatest tool is the power to paint a picture and sell it to the masses. The NYT caters to all these folks as well as their owner's greater financial interests.