Who wrote this headline in today’s New York Times: “Direction of Global War on Terror Raises Unsettling Questions”? Why is it “unsettling” for the United States to have achieved at least some success in its campaign against terrorism in Afghanistan? Why is it “unsettling,” as the article suggests, that the U.S. might take heart from this initial success and extend its campaign elsewhere? Wouldn’t it, in fact, be far more unsettling if the reverse had occurred and the U.S. was now retreating wounded from battle? The article adds nothing new to what we already know and doesn’t suggest any obvious reasons why we should now be worrying. In fact, it’s clear that the only people who’d find the direction of America’s war ‘unsettling’ at this point are the terrorists and leaders of rogue states who wish the West ill. So why on earth should the Times be looking at the world from their point of view?
BLOCK THAT METAPHOR DEPT.: “The phallic artwork has since been stolen, then recovered by police and will not be re-hung in the library.” – Scripps Howard News Service, November 19.
The Dish 