The conservative plan to colonizeoccupy liberate Iraq has caused many people to seriously re-think their positions.

William Buckley now says the Iraq invasion is a failure.  George Will has come to much the same conclusion.  Francis Fukuyama abandoned the Neocons.  Condi Rice says the government made thousands of errors in the Iraq project.  And on Sunday, former CENTCOM Commander General Anthony Zinni said Rumsfeld should resign.  

But, while some are coming to be critical of the invasion, others are sticking to their guns and coming up with eloquentwell-reasoned arguments for the war.

Christopher Hitchens for example:

1. Did you support the invasion of Iraq?

Yes: I was an advocate before the fact, not a supporter.

2. Have you changed your position?

Not in the least: I wish only that Saddam had not been able to rely upon Russian and French protection and the influence of oil-for-food racketeers and other political scum.

3. What should the U.S. do in Iraq now?

The United States and its allies should continue to stand for federal democracy, while making Iraq a killing-field for jihadists and fascists and a training ground for an army that will need to intervene again in other failed state/rogue state contexts.

Glenn Reynolds throws in his intellectual weight

1. Did you support the invasion of Iraq?


2. Have you changed your position?

No. Sanctions were failing and Saddam was a threat, making any other action in the region impossible.

3. What should the U.S. do in Iraq now?


And now Daniel Pipes explains the conservative mindset

Q: What is the biggest lesson you have learned from the Iraq war?

A: The ingratitude of the Iraqis for the extraordinary favor we gave them -- to release them from the bondage of Saddam Hussein's tyranny. They have rapidly interpreted it as something they did and that we were incidental to it. They've more or less written us out of the picture.

Q: How will we know when the occupation or the invasion of Iraq was a success or a failure?

A: Oh, it was a success. We got rid of Saddam Hussein. Beyond that is icing.

That's right, he said icing.

There's more...

No yellow ribbons from this ex-marine

...We can and should support troops-to-be, but do so before they become troops. We should post a warning sign, and disclaimer, in all recruiting stations. Prospective enlistees should be told that their new employer will not be the Department of Defense, but the Department of War; and that their service will not be in the defense of freedom and democracy, but in the building of an empire for America's powerful elite. And that their countrymen, for all the yellow ribbons and pseudo-patriotic talk, will ultimately blame them for the added terrorism they instigate with their wars. Just like there is truth in lending, we should demand truth in recruitment...

There's more...

The Failure To Understand Who And What Is The Enemy

It has taken me a while to write this diary, not so much because I didn't know what to say as much as I was unsure how others would take it. I am not by any means an expert in military affairs or foreign relations. I am merely an observer, and I would have to say that from early 1990s, I have been at first perplexed, and than incredulous of what has been going on in my government and in governments around the world. The following is an excerpt from a live journal of a soldier in Iraq.

posted 2/20/06...
"I started reading [omitted] LJ [Live Journal] because he recently came to Iraq and he's the husband of [omitted]. In his LJ he talks all about the so called "AIF" which really got me to thinking. I haven't seen the term AIF since Fort Stewart nearly a year ago. They never dropped that term at the NTC and I haven't seen it here, in Iraq. But it seems the Army still likes to use the term 'Anti Iraqi Forces' somewhere, because that guy certainly believes in it. And I'm not picking on him.
        I really don't understand the term AIF. I guess there are people here that would be 'AIF', but they are very few. Care to follow a list of my enemies?
Outright Enemies:
*  AIF = foreign insurgents that don't want to see an Iraq and hate America, true AIF
*  AIF = foreign insurgents from Syria or Saudi Arabia that support the secular Sunni a regime of Saddam Hussein.
*  AIF = foreign insurgents from Syria or Saudi Arabia that don't support the secular Saddam Hussein but are supportive of fundamentalist Wahibbism
*  AIF = foreign insurgents from Syria or Saudi Arabia that don't support the secular Saddam Hussein or fundamentalist Wahibbism, but hate Freedom
       Lets not forget that though we have either a truce or alliance that we have these enemies; I'll put 'AIF' on them for fun, but they're just as likely to be coalition forces:
*  AIF = so called 'Kurdish ethnic group' peoples wanting their own country
*  AIF = so called 'Kurdish ethnic group' peoples wanting their own place in the government
*  AIF = Shi'ite Militants that are local
*  AIF = Shi'ite Militants from Iran
*  AIF = Shi'ite Militants with "their own agenda"
*  AIF = Sunnis 'Arabs' for Iraq but not with America
*  AF = Sunnis that aren't 'Arab' for Iraq but not with America
      And of course the ones here in Iraq that don't play to outsiders, and also are my enemies:
*  AIF = Sunni Arabs native to Iraq
*  AIF = Sunni Arabs native to Iraq that hate the Shi'ites but want an free Iraq
*  AIF = Sunni Arabs that are Baathist and like Saddam Hussein
*  AIF = Sunni Arabs that are Baathist and don't like Saddam Hussein but like Syria
*  AIF = Sunni Arabs that are native to Iraq, don't like Shi'as
*  AIF = Sunni Arabs that are native to Iraq that don't like Shi'as and other Sunnis
*  AIF = Sunni Muslims that don't associate themselves as Arabs but associate with a group above
*  AIF = Sunni Muslims that don't associate themselves as Arabs OR a group above
The Sunni list goes on and on.
      Should I start with the Tribal list that could constitute 'AIF'?
     Perhaps it helps the simple, letterless Regular Army soldier. The E3 and E4 in the Army that is 20 years old and doesn't know shit about the world. Maybe that's what the AIF thing is all about. But really, I do hope that isn't getting to the Captains and Majors that run our S2s and S3s.
     It's President's Day. George Washington could have been king. He wasn't though. And because of that one man, Freedom and Democracy rule half the world today. Had he been a religious man perhaps it would be another Saint George, but he was a deist, and just another man. Today you should have been celebrating his birthday. If you didn't, you're wrong, but you still can fix it because I'm many hours ahead of you. Without George Washington, Freedom would be a misnomer. They came to George and said, "So do ya' want to be King?" And Georgie, the man on the Dollar, the man who had defeated Empire, he said, 'No. No, I didn't do this thing to be a king. I believed in Freedom, and Liberty. Our LAWS say that it is the People that lead Our Nation. Let them choose Another. I shall go home, to Virginia.'

There's more...


Advertise Blogads