celle du g\u00e9n\u00e9ral Myers<\/a>, pr\u00e9sident du comit\u00e9 des chefs d’\u00e9tat-major, saupoudr\u00e9e d’un peu de Rumsfeld en grains. Cela se situe le 26 avril, lors d’une conf\u00e9rence de presse.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\tLe commentaire du Guardian<\/em> suivi des d\u00e9clarations de Myers est le suivant : \u00ab The Pentagon has said that Iraq’s insurgents have lost none of their ability to inflict devastating attacks over the past year, further deflating hopes for a post-election respite. In recent weeks the pace of attacks has approached the violence of last spring, undermining claims by Washington that the US was making progress in Iraq. In terms of the number of incidents, it’s right about where it was a year ago, said General Richard Myers. Weeks will differ, and months will differ a little bit. But if you look at the scope of this, over time since May of 2003, that’s the conclusion you draw.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\tUn peu plus loin dans sa conf\u00e9rence de presse, Myers, qui s’en va en septembre et entend laisser un souvenir souriant et plein d’allant, fait cette appr\u00e9ciation de la situation en Irak, sans doute \u00e0 la lumi\u00e8re filtr\u00e9e de ce qu’il d\u00e9clarait quelques minutes plus t\u00f4t : \u00ab I think we’re definitely winning. I think we’ve been winning for some time.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\tQuelle explication donner \u00e0 ce qui semble \u00eatre, disons, une glissade de la pens\u00e9e d’un domaine \u00e0 un autre, du domaine des r\u00e9alit\u00e9s \u00e0 celui de l’\u00e9valuation bureaucratique et hollywoodienne? Sans surprise, on pourrait la tenir du secr\u00e9taire \u00e0 la d\u00e9fense Rumsfeld, parlant le m\u00eame jour, toujours imaginatif lorsqu’il s’agit d’expliquer \u00e0 la presse les nuances du spectacle du monde. La question qu’on lui pose est la m\u00eame qu’\u00e0 Myers, portant sur le fait de la victoire am\u00e9ricaine en Irak : oui ou non? \u00ab Winning or losing is not the issue in my view, in the traditional, conventional context of using the word winning’ and losing’ in a war. The people that are going to defeat that insurgency are going to be the Iraqis.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\tMyers n’\u00e9tait pas au courant des nuances s\u00e9mantiques de son chef. Pour Rumsfeld, c’est bien s\u00fbr : les USA ont termin\u00e9 leur magnifique travail. Aux Irakiens de s’en sortir eux-m\u00eames, et de l’emporter. Bref, l’attaque am\u00e9ricaine en Irak comme uvre de p\u00e9dagogie, avec Rumsfeld comme Platon (celui de l’Akademos<\/em>) postmoderne.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
\tMis en ligne le 28 avril \u00e0 13H40<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Oui, poursuivons l’\u00e9valuation de la situation en Irak, Made In Pentagon. La derni\u00e8re en date est celle du g\u00e9n\u00e9ral Myers, pr\u00e9sident du comit\u00e9 des chefs d’\u00e9tat-major, saupoudr\u00e9e d’un peu de Rumsfeld en grains. Cela se situe le 26 avril, lors d’une conf\u00e9rence de presse. Le commentaire du Guardian suivi des d\u00e9clarations de Myers est le… <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"neve_meta_sidebar":"","neve_meta_container":"","neve_meta_enable_content_width":"","neve_meta_content_width":0,"neve_meta_title_alignment":"","neve_meta_author_avatar":"","neve_post_elements_order":"","neve_meta_disable_header":"","neve_meta_disable_footer":"","neve_meta_disable_title":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[1417,569],"class_list":["post-66364","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-myers","tag-rumsfeld"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/66364","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=66364"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/66364\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=66364"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=66364"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=66364"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}