Betting your life is a good reason to demand more from media than “knowing what we know now” gotcha questions regarding past national security decisions.
The worst gotchas are framed to elicit a simplistic answer that reinforces or advances a political narrative. To do this, the talking head must either drastically simplify the past (a relatively benign act) or erase the inconvenient past (a deceitful act).
False premises shape the gotchas I’m deploring. Decision-makers in the past cannot know what we know now. These gotchas usually imply that an alternative decision would have produced a more benign alternative history. They may also presume a shared “enlightened crowd” viewpoint of current knowledge — which may indicate political or social bias.
Indeed. It should alarm us that a) media are fixated on this deceitful question, and b) Republicans are falling over each other to answer it.
“[In] the beginning we appointed all our worst generals to command the armies, and all our best generals to edit the newspapers. As you know, I have planned some campaigns and quite a number of battles. I have given the work all the care and thought I could, and sometimes, when my plans were completed, as far as I could see, they seemed to be perfect. But when I have fought them through, I have discovered defects and occasionally wondered I did not see some of the defects in advance. When it was all over, I found by reading a newspaper that these best editor generals saw all the defects plainly from the start. Unfortunately, they did not communicate their knowledge to me until it was too late.”
– Robert E. Lee (attrib.)
Any serious republican candidate shouldn’t be talking to the lamestream press. There’s no upside. Why would you agree to be interviewed by the campaign staff of the other team?
Republicans are the Party Of Stupid. They never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity. Voting Republican is something you hold your nose and do so that the DemocRats will lose, not because the Republicans are so awesome.
The Tea Party needs to work on that.
Deposing and then killing Saddam Hussein was the right thing to do, and Bush did it the right way as well. Obama single handedly squandered all the progress and good will Bush had built up, and he has replaced it with genocidal war as the Shia and the Sunni try to wipe each other out.
Some people see this as an Obama failure. That’s because they don’t understand Obama. This was his goal. He’s getting everything he wants here.
I guess it would make a politician a pariah to say it but, I still support the invasion of Iraq, ridding the world of Hussein, and (for a time) turning Iraq into a sponge that drew in tens of thousands of al Qaeda types to be slaughtered.
The most glaring mistake was the early withdrawal.
Had things been allowed to play out to the proper conclusion (the US leaving after a new order had firmly set into Iraq), an honest cost-benefit analysis still may have resulted in the only logical conclusion being that it was a mistake. But, to my mind, we’ll never know because the operation was shut-down prematurely.
What saddens me is that the media is getting away with setting it firmly in the minds of those in the west that there is nothing else to consider: it was a poorly conceived failure and that Bush and the Republicans should wear it and seek forgiveness.
Sean Hannity wonders why Democrats aren’t being asked the question, “Knowing what we know now, why did you and Obama pull ALL the troops out of Iraq? Why did you not leave a remnant of 10,000 troops to stabilize and keep the peace?”
Crickets on the question asked and naturally, crickets on the answer.
Victor Davis Hanson has an excellent summary: http://victorhanson.com/wordpress/?p=8428
Five great comments above mine, by the way!
Knowing what we know now..
Should JFK and LBJ avoided escalation in Viet Nam?
Should FDR have joined the rest of the allies in 1939?
“Knowing what we know now..
Should JFK and LBJ avoided escalation in Viet Nam?
Should FDR have joined the rest of the allies in 1939?”
Oh, hell. Why stop there?
Knowing what we know now, should Madison have attempted to invade the Canadas in 1812?
Hindsight is fun!
IMO, the “gotcha question” is a direct result of the MSM’s never-ending quest to make news into entertainment and to put the interviewer’s ego front and center if he is recognized for a “hit”. It only makes sense that a leftist controlled media would concentrate on attacking the right. A responsible and balanced media would be backed up with so many quality questions for politicians that this kind of tripe would never see the light of day.
Today’s media, a million square kms in area but only a mm thick.
C’mon asteroid.
“Knowing what we know now, would you still have voted for Obama?”
The knowing-what-we-know-now question re: Iraq presumes that the Iraq project had to fail. It also presumes, falsely, that the only reason to invade was the purported WMD. Where’s the so-called right-wing media pointing this out?
The Iraq project needn’t have failed. Grave, costly mistakes were made. But today’s chaos is the result of Obama’s determination to “lose the peace”. Take that, you imperialist warmongers.
So: “Knowing that Obama would deliberately turn Iraq into a catastrophe to serve his own ideology, would you have supported wasting thousands of American lives and enormous treasure on Iraq?” And, while you’re at it, “Knowing that Congress would lie to and then abandon South Vietnam to the Vietcong, would you have favoured wasting …”?
Remember that the origin of this question was the alleged right-wing extremist Meagan Kelly at Fox News.
OK…
Let’s make it personal.
Looking back upon YOUR life…however long or brief.
What would you have done different?
Probably everything….the point is that at those junctures…
…..you simply didn’t know.
It’s not the critic that counts….
Revisionism is the last resort of scoundrels….and fools….
Rick, thanks for the link to VDH’s excellent must-read on the Iraq rationale.
Two brief points – instead of simply looking back and finding fault – the usual tactic of superior lefties – what would you have done differently? Just sucked up 911 and wrung your hands? (Think JT objecting to an immigration document reference to female genital mutilation as “barbaric”. Did anybody in the media party ask him what term he would have substituted?)
Secondly, unlike some of the conflicts Obama got involved in without the approval of Congress, the Iraq war was voted in by the majority of Congress, including the Dems. Why is the MSM allowed to paint Iraq as a Bush/Republican venture? Although the question is foolish, if GOP members have to answer it, so should the Dems, as they were in favor of it just as much as the Repubs.
Nuts.
While I agree the question as it is being asked is dishonest, the answers being provided here and elsewhere are actually worse.
In reality WMD were found, and Mr. Bush et al were right to invade both Iraq and Afganistan. Where they made their mistake was in not calling the troops home right after the battle was won. Making peace is not a military function – Mission Accomplished meant mission accomplished. Had the troops been called home, the iraqis would have started a bloodbath – but they did that anyway so instead of a million or so dead in a month or two, we have several million dead and/or displaced over a decade. That’s not a gain.
And who was responsible? media and democrat personalities calling for the U.S. to do the impossible: recouncile people who want to kill each other. Thanks Obama, kerry, Clinton, Gore, ABC, NBC, CNN, etc etc
What we know now, we knew then. Saddam had invaded Kuwait and we didn’t finish him off properly the first time. Should we have left Kuwait in his hands? Should we countenance the invasion of a sovereign nation? Did leaving him in power lead to his aspiring to join the club of civilized nations? No, No, No. Not aggressively attacking those who invade countries has lead to the current mess in Iraq. The current situation in Iraq shows us that re-invading Iraq was exactly the right thing to do. We should go in again, just as hard as the last time, but this time screw nation building. Lay waste, get in, get out and if they re-arm go back and do it again.
Indeed, the Republican Party is the Party of Stupid, always looking for a way or ways to lose.
Re-invading Iraq is STILL the best thing to do.
“Knowing what ‘we know’ now” should be interrupted with “can I have a real question please?”
The media for the most part are incompetent and lazy with a limited view on the world, but with strong biases they let determine their “reporting.” If you are not a “progressive” they are out to screw you, to catch you in a gotcha moment. A simple “I don’t answer hypothetical questions” should suffice; it worked great for Chretien and the Grits and has for Harper and the Tories, with occasional slips. When a journalist evokes an opinion during a question, their assertion must be answered, not the question. To do otherwise is to encourage a meme.
On a related tangent – today in the Montreal area, a number of youths were detained, questioned & released but had their passports seized because apparently they were trying to join ISIS. An earnest man who deals with these misguided kids was interviewed by CTV. He stated the first thing they do is asked them why they are angry. The usual answers are “their people” are being attacked, that Muslims are mistreated here, plus of course the Palestinians.
The MO then is to say something like “you’re right, I feel your pain,” then determine with them how inappropriate it is under Islam do use violence in the manner contemplated. OK right?
IMHO, wrong. By all means show them Islam doesn’t allow their violence, but please go into their motivations and the reasons for their hatred. The three reasons articulated are all invalid – Muslims are the ones killing Muslims, the kind of discrimination they describe simply doesn’t exist in Canada to any discernible degree and it is the Palestinian leadership who are the genocidal barbarians working with rogue nations. If Muslim communities don’t deal with these dysfunctional beliefs, then it will be easier to bring in another religious source who will again reinforce the idea violence is acceptable.
This is important because of the religious and ideological partnership that is contemporary Islam – so allowing “grievances” to fester allows radicals to easily rebut peaceful Islam arguments with more militant ones by re-injecting the anger.
It is the invalid view the west is responsible for misery of Muslims everywhere that must be ultimately defeated; it is the true root cause that must be extinguished. Until that happens, until Muslim communities get our of their victimhood mentality, their young people will continue to be easy targets for Islamist recruiters because the anger, then hatred, then violence is recycled, with their adherents patiently waiting for the next round of recruits and militant fodder.
Knowing in 2003 what I know now, I would have invested in Lulu Lemon.
If I knew last week what I know today, then today I’d be cashing my winning lottery ticket.
I have always supported President George W. Bush’s decision to go into Iraq: he was a bit slow off the mark on account of Tony Blair’s need for political cover, and all that, etc.
And, naturally, I remain very sad about the loss of life of some 6,000, or so, allied personnel, and the more than 35,000 wounded.
But President Clinton essentially authorized it, with a vote from the Senate, etc. There is no question, really, as to whether it was legal or not, considering the UN resolutions, and Mr. Clinton’s signature on the Iraq Liberation Act, 1998.
As to whether the GOP is the party of stupid, etc., time will tell: I happen to believe that a Bush-Palin ticket would be a very persuasive offering, really. On the other hand, the Republicans have an enormous and impressive field: a fully-brokered convention would not be a bad thing, in the least.
Especially, when compared with the, um, Democrats…
LOL. Yes, it’s never the right time for the neo-cons to re-litigate their past mistakes since the consequences from them are constantly filling the world with new threats we need to smash with more futile military adventures. Why should that stop the rest of us from pointing out their follies? And since when do conservatives have to be water-carriers for these big government loving, ex-liberals who have been wrong about everything for 20 years?
The foreign policy prescriptions of people like Kristol, Kagan, et al. should be taken as seriously as foreign policy advice from Ron Paul.