Sully admits, grudgingly, "Many reasonable people argue that the Iraq invasion made matters worse, not better in the short term. Let's concede that, for the sake of argument. But deep down, how do we drain the swamp of Islamo-fascism?" How about the way that many of us proposed back in 2002-2003 while Sully was infatuated with Baghdad? Afghanistan and Palestine. Nail al-Qaeda and the Taliban, for which we had worldwide support, and really rebuild Afghanistan (thus demonstrating that we were serious about this not being a crusade). Meanwhile pull a Bush I on Israel and force through a real solution to the West Bank and Gaza. With all of that going on, it's really doubtful that Saddam would have held out for more than a year or two....
And why on earth does Sully raise the spectre of Saddam helping al-Qaeda? Has he learned nothing? Is his argument so weak that he has to grasp at such totally discredited straws?
Of coure all of this is purely hypothetical, and presumes a basic competence in policy execution which is obviously absent in Bush's team of bozos. In hindsight, since they were going to screw things up whatever they did, it would have been better if they'd done as little as possible to exacerbate the situation.
Posted by geoff2 at July 12, 2005 10:37 PMHow terribly ignorant! You really need to do a little more research before implying that we should have done nothing. It seems that you have been woefully misinformed about al-Qaeda's reach, intent, or hatred of all things 'Western'. Too bad.
Posted by: Rob at July 12, 2005 11:43 PMI didn't imply that we should have done nothing. In fact I identified very specifically what we should have done. Read what I said. Good grief....
Posted by: Geoff Arnold at July 13, 2005 12:55 AMIt's not "hatred of all things 'Western'". It's hatred of having foreign powers in their countries. As soon as western powers leaves Iraq alone, as long as western powers see Israel's mistreatment of Palestinians for what it is -- fundamental abuses of human rights -- al-Qaeda not only will no longer have a basis for recruiting but also will have no point in existing. They'll fade out completely since they're really nothing more than a reaction to the mistreatment of Arabs by western powers.
Posted by: Jeremy Pave at July 14, 2005 01:20 PM"Fade out completely"? That may be too optimistic. The rise in religious fundamentalism seems to be a world-wide phenomenon - we're seeing it in the US and Israel, as well as in Moslem countries. Even if the west ceased to "provoke" groups like al-Qaeda, the tensions in countries such as Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan, Algeria, Egypt, and so forth would continue. And could "provocation" really end in an increasingly globalized economic system? Even if governments restrained themselves, would corporations follow suit?
Posted by: Geoff Arnold at July 14, 2005 03:57 PMYes, "fade out completely" is a bit optimistic. But I'm so tired of hearing people go on and on like George W. Bush with his "They just hate freedom." Because that means that there are no solutions, and that there's no point in trying, and therefore you may as well stay in Iraq because leaving won't make any difference.
Posted by: Jeremy Pave at July 15, 2005 05:32 AM