The SF Weekly has a feature on What the left got wrong about Iraq.  

 

The author adopts the very pro-war position interviewing Iraqis who remained pro-invasion  after we toppled Sadaam, despite suffering personal tragedies.

 

But then he says,

 

The reason I recount these stories now, long after I first heard and reported them, is that they point toward a different narrative of the war than often heard in anti-war circles. It's not the fact that the Americans invaded Iraq that makes Iraqi people so angry; it's the fact that they stayed.

 

Well, I emailed him, asking for any evidence that he did in fact report this perspective ‘long’ ago.  

 

Enjoyed your piece in the SF Weekly on the war.

I was wondering if you have a link to anything you
reported on al-Mufwrakiyya while you were there, or
shortly after, I can't seem to google it.

thanks
Sean

 

The reply  came in as I typed this.

 

Dear Sean,

 

Thanks for the kind words. The only place where I have reported on the early war period besides in the SF Weekly is in my book, How America Lost Iraq, which was released last week. There is a whole chapter there on al-Mufrakkiya and its surroundings.

 

Aaron

 

So have three questions

  1. Why does his article falsly imply that he reported these Pro-Bush attitudes of Iraqis? 
  2. Why didn’t he report it? 
  3. Is his new position really that the resistance wouldn't exist had we not  stuck around to fight it?

I guess I need to read the book.