Just read Part III of the LA Times series on medical care in Iraq, "New Battle on the Home Front." You may have to register for the whole thing.

Overall, I thought Part III was a pretty good article. It looks at a few people working to recover from their wounds, and notes that pretty much all of them want to go back to Iraq. It covers some of the ups and downs, and offers some fine stories of determination and people who live the meaning of "service". It treats the people involved like human beings rather than dupes or some servant underclass, offers profiles not selected echo chambers, and lets them speak in their own voices.

Do I have some issues with the series? Yes. The front-page photo choice was pathetic, especially in light of things they have previously chosen NOT to show or discuss. The examples selected and the way the article was wrotten also misrepresent the profiles of the wounded in Iraq, most of whom are back on duty in under 48 hours. Do I think the LA Times has a record? Yes. No question that there's an agenda, and it's a corporate-level agenda (Patterico has tons more on this subject).

Having said all that... it's honest and necessary to acknowledge when things are done right, and they did some important things right here as well. Things that very often, are not done right.