Ten years ago, Michael Gordon and Judith Miller of the New York Times helped the Bush case for war by publishing frightening articles about Saddam Hussein's Iraq having “stepped up” its drive for nuclear weapons and chemical stockpiles. Miller later went to prison briefly for protecting her sources, left the Times under a cloud of embarrassment, and finally took a position as a neo-con-supporting commentator.
But Michael Gordon never stopped, and this week he published a front-page article, "In U.S. Exit From Iraq, Failed Efforts and Challenges," and new book essentially blaming Barack Obama for ending the war without a “victory.” No doubt the Gordon article will be cited by the Romney Republican campaign, as well as revisionist historians, in the months and years to come.
Gordon’s definition of proper American goals for Iraq – a stable representative government loosely allied to the US – could not be achieved under any US administration. He is setting in motion the process of “blaming Obama” for ending the US military campaign instead of perpetuating a forever war.
For more analysis of Gordon’s version of events, please see also by Tom Hayden, “US Special Forces Deployed in Iraq, Again.”