A War Story Prompts A Battle
"[T]hese 1000 [military personnel who signed a petition urging withdrawal] are a good example of why we do not want or need the draft," wrote "lars008." "[A]ll those liberals nancying around getting in the way of getting the job done..... all they do is help the enemy."
And from the other side we have we have this, from "detbob2": "It's very easy for cowards like Bush and Cheney to continue to recite their slogans (stay the course with more troops) because they have no personal stake in this war (for profit) that they started. Nobody they care about is over there fighting and they use other people's money; what a couple of bloodsucking unpatriotic leeches these people are!"
In comments made before the story even aired, Sean Hannity called it a "hit piece." The Fox News host added this: "It is designed to, as far as I'm concerned, work with the Democrats in Congress, embolden the enemy, undermine the troops."
The story spotlighted a group of active military personnel who want the war to end. Correspondent Lara Logan seemed sympathetic to the GIs, but she also gave voice to those who object to their actions. "There are going to be a lot of people listening to this who say that, 'You're a traitor. You're betraying your uniform. You don't deserve to wear it,'" Logan said to the group.
The piece also included comments from soldiers who stay firmly behind the war effort and from White House Press Secretary Tony Snow, who said it is unfortunate that those military personnel who oppose the war are "going to be able to get more press than the hundreds of thousands who have come back and said they are proud of their service.'"
Whether the story should have run is, of course, a news judgment call. One way to decide for yourself is to think about whether those who have called for the war to be ended represent a significant portion of military personnel. If only 10 – or even 1,000 – GIs want the war ended, it's a relatively small percentage of the force. But if that group is just the tip of the iceberg, the story seems that much more worthwhile.
Which is why this comment by Logan was so important: "According to a recent Military Times survey, many in uniform feel the same way. The poll found that for the first time ever more US soldiers oppose the president's handling of the war in Iraq than support it."
Newsbusters suggests that statistic was "cherry-picked," noting that "41 percent of troops questioned felt that it was correct for the U.S. to go to war in Iraq, as opposed to 37 percent who felt it was a mistake." But it seems to me that if 37 percent felt the war was a mistake, the 1,000 GIs spotlighted last night aren't exactly voices in the wilderness.