In an unintentionally funny piece today in the Washington Post, Steven Simon and Ray Takeyh discuss whether or not president Obama would use military force if it were the only way to prevent Iran from gaining nuclear weapons. The article purports to be an even handed analysis of Obama's dilemma. In actual fact, however, the authors find roadblock after roadblock to the successful use of force. They tell us what the US'a European allies will do. They tell us how slowly the UN will be to act. They describe the views of countries neighboring Iran. They even tell us what the reaction of the American public will be to an attack. In many respects, they act like pollsters do in telling us the views of the world. Of corse, the only problem is that the authors do not first take a poll. They give us the results without first doing any research at all.
In view of this new standard being used in the Washington Post, I suggest that the Post write its election story now. I would like to read who wins in November without having to wait for the voting. Maybe The Post can then write a story outlining the economic growth for the country over the next five years. Better still, the Post could write to tell us which stocks will go up and by how much.
It would be nice if articles like this one were barred from newspapers by intelligent editors. I coubt that will ever happen at the Washington Post.
No comments:
Post a Comment