Glenn Reynolds quotes leftie Kevin Drum in answer to a challenge from a reader;
“In other words, democracy is nice � eventually � but the bigger issue is kicking over the status quo in the Middle East and forcing change. And the hawks would argue that this is happening. Slowly and fitfully, to be sure, but let’s count up the successes so far: Iraq and Afghanistan are better off than before, Libya has given up its nuke program, Lebanon’s Cedar Revolution is a sign of progress, Egypt has held a more open election than any before it, and the Syrian regime is under considerable pressure.
Did the invasion of Iraq precipitate these changes? I think the hawks considerably overstate their case, but at the same time they do have a case. Even if Iraq is a mess, it might all be worthwhile if it eventually produces progress toward a more open, more liberal Middle East. At the very least, it’s an argument that needs to be engaged.”
I think the critics overstate their case, and rather consistently ignore the good news that Kevin notes. My anonymous emailer thinks that U.S. casualties are proof of a quagmire. That’s an odd formulation, since it means that any war in which troops are killed, which means pretty much any war generally, is a quagmire. There’s no question that some antiwar folks think that’s true, but pardon me if I’m unimpressed with that argument. (What I said here in 2003 about antiwar folks being disappointed that things had gone so well seems to remain true, as people keep making every effort to portray Iraq as Vietnam). Saddam’s on trial, Iraqis are counting ballots, and as noted above we seem to have shaken things up — though I’d argue not enough yet — throughout the mideast.
If Bush’s effort here fails, it won’t be because the antiwar critique of bloodthirstiness and warmongering is correct. It will be because Bush hasn’t been vigorous enough in toppling governments and invading countries in the region. What happens with Syria in the next little while may answer that question.
If it’s the number of US casualites that the antiwar set is hanging their “quagmire” definition on, then it’s pretty safe to say their arguments are largely disingenuous – or historically dyslexic.
I started out as a big fan of GW Bush, but lately have come to see him largely as a social conservative, but a wimp when it comes to filling the shoes of the “most powerful man on the planet”.
Whether there is prayer in school or if abortion remains legal is all irrelevant if we are overrun with religious zelots of the more violent mindless kind.
My message to Bush is,
Take off the gloves and drain that swamp faster. If the dems get in in the next election it will be because you didn’t do what needed to be done and then it may never get done and then WE will all be done.
If you want my vote, send in more marines and get that job done.
Next Up Syria?
Well France can do this one.
No need for the US to do this. There is enough on the plate right now. Its an easy argument to say that invading Syria would be part of helping Iraq….
Problem, you cant shut the borders of Iraq. Too big, too much to defend.
Should the UN take action? Sure, whatever that means, but now is NOT the time. It is not in Canada’s interest to see our major trading partner go further down a rat hole of expense. It isnt in US interests either.
I supported the invasion of Iraq based on the idea that Hussein either had WMD or was going to restart once the sanctions fell….wouldnt have supported a war of liberation…but would have in Gulf War 1
Syria can be contained till later, or taken care of through covert action.
Expansion if the war to Syria or Iran would be a very large mistake. Diplomatic pressure and proxy support for Syrian democratic opposition is not a mistake.
Duke, sorry to insult you but you�re sounding like a Canadian.
If Bush doesn�t heed you, who will you vote for? The Hildebeast?
Just dreaming, but wouldn�t it be nice if the rest of the world would help out America and Blair and Howard, as Stephen suggests.
Anyway I agree I�d like to see Bush get tougher, maybe take out Iran while he can. Diplomacy only works with rational people, these people are animals.
But I just don�t have enough info to put it all in perspective. These terrorists have been around for centuries, they are growing in numbers and spreading, they are living amongst us. For example our papers today say that insurgents from Montreal are fighting Americans in Baghdad.
So this War is not going to end by 2008 no matter what Bush does.
America will keep winning as long as 51% support the effort at election time. But this will go on for decades IMHO.
If you reread the post, you’ll notice mention of Libya and Lebanon, as well as Egypt – none of which required an act of war to begin to make steps, however small, in response to the results in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Syria is now isolated and their government on the hotseat – change could quite as easily come from within.
Some 2,000 dead in a major land campaign and then growing insurgency over two and a half years are, crass though it sounds, peanuts for a country of almost 300 million people.
Canada suffered 907 fatalities in one day at Dieppe in 1942; our population was about 12 million.
A good column by Salim Mansur in the Toronto Sun, Oct. 22, “A new day has dawned”
http://www.torontosun.com/News/Columnists/Mansur_Salim/2005/10/22/1273311.html
Excerpt:
‘Four days after the referendum, the world and, most importantly, Iraqis, watched Saddam Hussein appear in the prisoner’s dock as the first of many charges against him were read out in court. The sight of the tyrant facing a special tribunal arranged to prosecute him and senior members of his regime is a political earthquake whose tremors will resonate for a long time across the Middle East.
Never before — anywhere in the Arab world — has a population participated freely and willingly in the shaping of its government as Iraqis are doing — despite the tremendous violence directed against them by bloody-minded insurgents. Never, in the 1,400 years of Islam, has an Arab-Muslim despot been brought into a court of justice to answer for crimes of rape, torture and murder of people under him.
This is a uniquely riveting moment in Arab-Muslim history, and everyone in the region is mesmerized by the events occurring in Iraq.
But none of this could have been imagined without regime change in Baghdad. The midwife of a new Arab politics is, without any quibble, U.S. President George Bush.
It needs repeating that without Bush’s decision for regime change in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the sacrifices of U.S. and coalition soldiers, more than 50 million Muslims would not have been liberated.’
But the Bush adminstration’s handling of Iraq itself has hardly been brilliant–see “Official Says U.S. Rushed to War in Iraq”, LA Times, Oct. 22
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-usiraq22oct22,0,5442173.story?track=tothtml
Mark
Ottawa
Kate,
I agree. It think change will come from within SYria and Iran. It takes time, patience and consitency…and likely some clever diplomacy and special ops to make it happen.
I do worry that the drums start to beat for an invasion…while always an option is just not wirth considering at this point.
It would be nice to see the lead for the pressure to come from France, who should they fail to do anything will lose whatever influence they think they have in the region.
The underlying problem in the Arab world remains the same, Saudi Arabia, the house of Saud and Wahabi extreamism within the Muslim Religion.
nomdenet,
You start by sort of insulting me, then you went on to say nothing other that to parrot pretty much what I already stated.
1. The alternative to voting for Bush is not voting at all …. remember that option?
2. It goes without saying that the rest of the world won’t help the US Britain and Aussieland.
3. You said Bush needs to get tougher and make more progress (that’s what I said remember … send in more marines … ??)
4. You mentioned taking out Iran like it’s a drive by shooting. They are not wimps and likley have nuke material to toss if needed. How about one thing at a time?
5. Then you went on to babble about not having enough information to “put it all in perspective” … well that one was obvious.
6. Finally, you stated what the point of my comment was, that if he doesn’t get 51% of the vote there will be trouble.
Well dork brain .. .that was the point … if he wants to get my vote (or anyone elses) he will have to make that war look better than it does now.
If the American people think Bush is losing the war, they will consider a new commander and chief.
Other points, you say this war will go on for many more years … goes without saying … everyone knows that already
Your other comments about these terrorist being around for centuries is a stupid comment.
You comment that they are irrational and are animals is also silly since anyone with a brain knows they are irrational and technically speaking we are all animals. Some humans are in denial on that one.
You might consider that anyone who does the bidding of an imaginary deity who we have never seen and there is not a shred of evidence that one even exists …. is irrational in any case so you can extend that thought to Jerry Falwell, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, the pope etc.
It’s worth noting that the invisible, has very much in common with the non-existent. Most of the gods in charge of various areas of this planet are all invisible. We may simply be at war with a bunch of imaginations gone haywire. That’s humour Nom!
To sum here nom, you started by insulting and went on to state either an inanity or the obvious.
If you want to add to someone’s comment in the future try not starting with an insult … you may then be mistaken for an adult .. and I wouldn’t have to waste time explaining this to you …. it could work for you.
Finally, try to make your commment either your very own personal opinion or at least enteraining in some way.
This ‘democracy’ thing sounds like a great idea. But instead of all the chin-wagging about tossing out the status-quo in the Mid-east, howzabout getting our own house in order, first?
OK Duke as a Canadian I�m not very practised at debate with someone who wants to go faster � usually I�m defending Bush to my fellow Canadians for him doing anything but sipping tea with Islamofascists and being �nice�. I didn�t intend to insult you but I guess I did � sorry.
I can�t imagine anyone worried about terrorism getting mad enough at Bush to vote Democrat and I guess that�s what got me off on the wrong foot because Canadians generally think that if only the Dems get back in the world is going to be safer. However with the Dems in you�ve already said �then WE will all be done� and I agree with that.
Given that these terrorists are now harboured all over the globe (as I mentioned under noses in Montreal, to the denial of most Canadians) this is a war against a movement rather then against countries. But as Kate mentions maybe if enough countries continue to swing over to democracy that will eventually have an impact, hopefully before the next election. Thankfully I don�t have to make any decisions about this � today anyway. Cheers.
More people have died of C-difficile in Quebec hospitals since the beginning of the war than American soldiers have died of “insurgent” violence in Iraq. True story.
Long term average for the American armed forces is about seven hundred deaths per year from accidents, illness, suicide and homicide. It is not much more dangerous to serve in Irag than to serve in the U.S.
I doubt we will seen an invasion of Syria – with the situation in Iraq, it would probably be counterproductive to invade now. I also agree with Kate; I think internal change due to foreign pressure is more likely here.
Let’s not forget Syria has experienced many political changes since Damascus was founded about 6000 years ago. What is one more regime change?
John Murney: Good.
Mark
Ottawa
It’s not a war, it’s a Debacle.
Opposition to the war isn’t hanging on just on casualities. That’s restricting the argument of those you disagree with. It’s like saying support for the war hangs on the fact that there really haven’t been enough casualties.
Opposition hangs on the lies to sell it and the stalling of the war on terrorism. Where’s Osama.
Where is osama? Who cares? He is old and sick in body.
He wont live much longer.
The war is a raving success. The Iraqi people want self-determination, democracy and freedom, and they are determined to have it. Only a fool would still believe Iraq will not be a representative Democracy.
Maybe there wouldn’t be so many Americans voters (60%) opposed to the war if Rumsfeld had listened and sent 3x as many soldiers and had the army needed to secure the peace.
Gee, Steve, which is it: the opposition to the war results from (a) the lies told about it, the “stalling” of the WOT, and the fact Osama is still a free man or (b) Rumsfeld’s not sending three times as many troops to Iraq?
You seem to be a might confused and confounded — what, your not knowing what the War on Terrorism is (i.e., not comprehending that Iraq is part of the WOT) and why support for the war (whatever it is) is not higher.
Or is support high?
Today’s letter is “P” as in patience. Establishing consensual government, thus proving it can be done in an Arab nation, is the end-goal. It is being done but is not complete.
Today’s number is “n” for the unknown amount of time it will take to complete the job. How long do we take to train soldiers over here? How about police and other security personnel? Try to put it into a realistic perspective (unless your goal is taking shots.)
The strategy of turning Iraq over to the Iraqis cannot be achieved until they are ready to take over their own security, and although terrific gains have been made by some extraordinary people Iraq will continued to be threatened by Iran and Syria (as well as the Saudis.)
We’ve been screwing up since 1979 and the failure to remove Saddam after Gulf War I made a bad situation worse. Such momumental errors are not rectified over the course of a few years.
Bush has disappointed on many things but not on foreign policy, and I’ll vote for those who will defend my country and not bargain it away. So what if he’s a social conservative? He’s entitled to his views but his personal beliefs don’t translate to law – or do people still fail to comprehend the vast implications of separation of powers? Sheesh. Take a fraking civics course.
Nomennovum, you got in just ahead of me (pays to look below before hitting “post.”) I’d say support is still pretty high; the continuing negative press worries a lot of people yet the recent referendum is more widely understood as an Iraqi victory than the press lets on.
Don’t forget, Kerry had to lean pretty far to the right and become pro-war (with his Secret Plan) to ammass even a minority of votes.
Hey, I was an army brat and grew up in CDN bases all over the world. I support the troops.
I just thought if he hadn’t done stupid things like intimidate the CIA and fix intelligence and ignore his Generals, and put the troops in harm’s way without body armor for all and safer vehicles then his men might have had a chance to win and secure the after-invasion.
1996 dead by today. 47,400 est. amputeed, wounded, injured, mentally ill.
Iraq is create-more-terrorists part of the WOT.
You bought the lies.
“Forty-five percent of Iraqis believe attacks on U.S. and British troops are justified, according to a secret poll said to have been commissioned by British defense leaders and cited by The Sunday Telegraph.
Less than 1 percent of those polled believed that the forces were responsible for any improvement in security, according to poll figures.
Eighty-two percent of those polled said they were “strongly opposed” to the presence of the troops.”
Winning hearts and minds
All Quiet
on the Baghdad Front
When Iraqis went to the polls, the best news was what didn’t happen.
by Michael Yon
10/31/2005, Volume 011, Issue 07
Baghdad
I WAS IN BAQUBA during Iraq’s January elections, having hitched a ride with the U.S. Army to a polling site. There were bombs exploding, mortars falling, and hot machine guns. The fact that the voting was going great despite the violence was something few people expected. Until that day, I’d been skeptical about Iraq. Not fashionably cynical, merely skeptical. We could all hear what President Bush, Prime Minister Blair, and other elected leaders were saying, but they are politicians. We also could hear the end-of-the-Iraqi-world predictions by so many others. But nobody really knew what the Iraqi people had in mind, and the Iraqis were the people who counted most.
The millions who voted sent a message: Serpentine lines of ebullient Iraqis risked their lives–dozens died–to have a say in their futures. People who voted dipped their right index fingers into purple ink and cast their ballots. The image of Iraqis proudly holding their stained fingers aloft became a symbol for the success of the election. In Baquba, many voters asked me to photograph them as they left the polling places, all smiles and purple fingers.
The courage of the Iraqi people that January day planted a seed of confidence. These were not timid or cowering souls. There I was: an American alone in a dangerous Iraqi city, at the very polling site that soldiers were wagering would be bombed. One after another, Iraqis came and shook my hand, showing me their children, laughing, smiling, saying over and over, Thank you, thank you, thank you. I felt like an honored guest, and I felt a twinge of shame that I’d been less confident in the Iraqis than they were in themselves. The voice of the Iraqi people had risen above the clamor of insurgent violence.
But that was hardly the end of the story. Soon came reports that insurgents were targeting people with purple fingers. And in the months since, terrorists have murdered thousands more Iraqis, and hundreds of coalition soldiers. With Iraqis due to return to the polls for a referendum on their new constitution, I wondered which was stronger: the terror or the hope. Would the Iraqi people speak with softer and more tentative voices now after the slaughter of thousands?
For a variety of reasons, I decided the place to be on election day was alongside Command Sergeant Major Jeffrey Mellinger, the top enlisted man for coalition forces in Iraq and right-hand man to Gen. George W. Casey, himself the U.S. commander in Iraq. I’d spent three weeks with Mellinger earlier in the year, driving around Iraq, down to Kuwait, then flying over the Arabian Gulf to ships and oil platforms. Mellinger has been in the Army for 33 years, as best I can tell loving every bit of it, except maybe for the times he was laid up in the hospital. I knew that wherever he was, Mellinger would be where things were happening. >>
http://www.rapp.org/url/?UP39U2S4
weekly standard via instapundit
“Forget the myths the media’s created about the White House. The truth is, these are not very bright guys, and things got out of hand.”
~ Deep Throat. From the 1976 film “All the President’s Men.”
Where are PP Pettigrew/Bruno on this?>>>>
Rice, Straw demand action over Hariri killing
Reuters.uk – 7 hours ago
LONDON (Reuters) – A UN report on the killing of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik al-Hariri is “very serious” for Syria and the international community must act, the United States and Britain said on Sunday. … >>> cnews
Any country that supports and shelters terrorists should have sanctions against it and bombed back to the stone age
“bombed back to the stone age”
That could be expensive.
Wait for peak oil and we’ll all be there.
So many insurgents, so little time.
NYT, aka Ole Gray Lady, spins the Report: self-loathing & suicide from the left. >>>>
“The United States of America is perhaps the most flagrantly irresponsible nation on Earth. We, who have the power to end wars. We, who have the power to save lives. We, who triumph over injustice, oppression, and any other petty obstacles the world throws in our path. We have failed in our duty to help make the world a peaceful and pleasant place to live. It is thus our duty now to resolve the aftermath of that oversight.” more>>> complete article here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1507754/posts
Sample comment:
To: Aristogeiton
The UN report shows how the Syrians never thought anyone was going to investigate. They thought their dominance of the Lebanese government was going to protect their shananigans as this was enough to protect them after similar assassinations in the past. The vehicle used in the bombing came from Syria! I love it! Lebanese everywhere are rejoicing for their newfound freedom and honor Hariri for his martyrdom. They also understand that without George W. Bush holding the Syrians’ feet to the fire and putting pressure on them, they would never have left, as the massive demonstrations in Lebanon wouldn’t have happened.
16 posted on 10/23/2005 11:23:17 AM PDT by winner3000
I was thinking about this Iraq/Syria/Iran lunacy at little earlier today and just why the heck the US has been getting involved in this stuff. For the last couple of weeks I’ve also been watching the DVD edition of “The World at War”. It struck me, while watching the D-Day episode last night that the US had no business being in WW II either. Now before you liberal lurkers think I’m heading off into an Al Gore moment here, think again. The US is preserving and spreading democracy. Bush is still an asshole in my opinion but the outcome ain’t so bad.
Lets see now…. Afghanistan has rolled, Iraq has rolled, Lebannon has rolled, Palestine has rolled, Libya has rolled. Turkey has been wisely lined up for the EU.
So who do we have left??? Syria, who will roll in the next 12 months and Iran who will roll within five years. Danm, not much left.
I somewhat agree with your analysis, JUSTAFARMER, however, the Americans don’t have the military resources to throw at Syria right now. Something else needs to happen…and I think Syria is going to seriously lie low for the next six months to avoid that “something else”.
That something else involves terrorist actions against America or it’s interests that has Syrian “fingerprints”. That would shift American public opinion into overdrive and take the cuffs off the president to allow direct action against the Syrian government heads. So I think it might take 18 months or longer for radical elements in Syria to make their move (they can and will wait for the right moment).
Just trust a Farmer to cut to the quick, see through the chaff and give you a clear and direct picture.
An Albertan farmer said some time back when clear and undeniable evidence came to light, directly implicating Chretien and Martin, [Brault evidence, I think], why are these two criminals not behind bars.
Simplistic? Direct ? Maybe, but accurate all the same. 73s TG http://My.Opera.com/T-G/
[Servers under maintenance today. Try again later]