I thought I felt safer this morning.
Here's an interesting thought: the liberation of Iraq bears more resemblance to the Clinton-Blair led war to liberate Kosovo than the Bush (41) action to remove Iraq from Kuwait.
One area of new-conservatism that I, erm... like, is that American military power can be used to intervene in foreign countries to remove totalitarian regimes. That Policeman of the World thing. (I can hear the Reaganites shuddering). Unfortunately, that's not how this conflict was originally billed, nor were the people in charge of this thing competent enough to pull it off. Or should I say, competent enough to pull it off without alienating our allies, enraging Muslim quarters, and causing untold suffering among the very people we are trying to help.
Three cheers (Shia, Sunni, Kurd) for this vote. It's a step on a long journey. I wonder what the Constitution will look like after they edit it again (which was one of the stipulations in order to get Sunni approval).
Posted by rladew on 2005-10-17 17:01:52 +0000
Condi had a good point on MTP yesterday:
something to the extent of whether or not this current version of the constitution passes, democracy will be in due process either way.
The Iraqi people are going to the polls in much much larger numbers than seen before and I believe (correct me if Im wrong) there are now close to 40 some odd Iraqi battalions attempring to make Iraqis feel more secure going to the polls.
A success? not entirely, no, but any type of democracy is better than a tyrannical and murderous dictatorship and if a democracy holds in Iraq ,whos to say it cant be followed in places like Syria?
_______________________________
Posted by dawnbixtler on 2005-10-17 18:45:26 +0000
I think the USA is a little over our collective heads in Iraq. Invading Syria would be a bad idea.
Not to be the devil's advocate, but does anyone believe a democracy will hold in Iraq when/if the US leaves?
Posted by tgl on 2005-10-17 19:33:22 +0000
Thought there is only one battalion ready (which represents a 67% decline in readiness). Unless they've added 39 in the past two weeks.
---
That's my point: the idea of democracy being birthed by American troops and rolling through the Middle East is a very liberal idea, some would say Wilsonian. This is the kind of thing that got scoffed at by paleo-conservatives when Clinton and Blair led the charge into Kosovo.
Give me a call when the US decides to topple another tyrannical and murderous dictatorship... I've got a list of 'em. Sorry for the cynicism, but, I don't think the reason the Iraqis are able to vote in astounding numbers is entirely due to American altruism. There are plenty of people in the world still in chains that we don't give a piss about. Given the choice of A) keeping American soldiers alive, or B) sending them to die for some foreigner's ability to vote, the American public will choose A) everytime. I congratulate Bush & Co. on getting over that hurdle with shady claims of impending doom.
Bush told us he needed to go there to save our asses, not to promote freedom. Good news for Iraqis though, glad they are grateful.
Posted by dawnbixtler on 2005-10-17 20:08:52 +0000
Good points.
The Pat Buchanan crowd is the most vocal about leaving Iraq. The idea of "World Police" is very neo-con.
Also the list of Bush's excuses to invade Iraq is astounding. How many American's in March of '02 would have allowed an invasion in Iraq on the grounds of "Democracy in the Middle East"? 15%? 20%?
Posted by cdubrocker on 2005-10-18 17:09:43 +0000
For some people, it's a case of the end justifying the means, but I think the means are flawed. When I think of a long-lived democracy, I think of the US, and how while efforts in the Revolutionary War were aided by foreign governments, they were mainly working behind the scenes, and in an auxiliary fashion. In my opinion, in order to have any staying power a democratic form of government needs to be homegrown. It might sound nice and beneficial to depose a tyrant and to install a democracy, and put forth fast paced reforms to create a representative government...but will it last? The people driving this train are more interested in short-term triumphalism than long-term baby-steps. It's like creationism v. evolution!
Posted by dawnbixtler on 2005-10-18 18:27:55 +0000
The means justify the ends...
Posted by G lib on 2005-10-18 19:26:59 +0000
here here, cdub!
______________
What's cooler than cool? Ice cold! --Andree 3K
Posted by rladew on 2005-11-01 22:41:20 +0000
Ill be interested to see how December 15th pans out.
_______________________________
Posted by rladew on 2005-11-01 23:19:05 +0000
Miles Davis opinions aside, Crouch is making some bold, interesting statements here.
_______________________________
Posted by tgl on 2005-11-02 01:43:05 +0000
"First, it will send a momentous signal throughout the Arab world and accelerate a movement toward freedom that is already stirring in countries like Kuwait, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, and even Syria."
Don't they send a momentous signal every 6 months? Each step is a small, necessary, step. I wish them luck, I really do. The results of democracy can be messy (channeling Rumsfeld there...) will we be happy with a government that looks like Iran's?
"Second, it would set the scene for carefully and cautiously beginning the withdrawal of some American troops."
I thought withdrawal was predicated on the ability of Iraqi troops to provide security themselves. So far, success at the ballot box hasn't translated to success on the battlefield.
Posted by tgl on 2005-11-02 02:00:41 +0000
I can't argue that freedom does not come at a price. Crouch is agreeable there. I can argue that Americans aren't always willing to pay the price for other's freedom. The stark answer to "If Iraq was not represented as a threat to American soil, would we be at war?" is NO. Unfortunate but true. So far, I haven't been convinced that waging war was the best way to remove Hussein; sort of like pulling a rotten tooth with a claw hammer. It has been prosecuted poorly, but that doesn't mean that with perfect planning everything would be rosy today.
I can be glad that Hussein is gone while being disappointed that others suffer. Here and here, for example. If spreading freedom is so important to this President, why stop at Iraq? Or are we downplaying the importance of spreading Iraqi oil?