Mike, I missed that timewarp too -- but look around! The signs are everywhere. I think the temporal rift opened while people were distracted by the recount in the last presidential election.
More and more of the thirties has been seeping into the present ever since.
Tom,
What a completely bogus dichotomy! The removal of the beast, Saddam, was in no way contingent on the destruction of the museum, libraries, hospitals, or powerplants. As I'm sure you are aware, this line of argument is untenable, so why bother trotting it out again?
I like the next bit of nonsense you bring forth:
If this is the worst that one can say about the war, it clearly wasn't the disaster the opponents of war said it was going to be.
In the first clause, I presume that by "this" you mean the looting of Iraq's cities, with attendant rape, homicide, sniping at US troops, destruction of hopitals, powerplants, priceless antiquities and texts. it's not entirely clear what you mean by "it" in the second clause.
If by "it" you mean the war as a whole, as seems likely, then you are not addressing the "destruction of archeological treasures and so on" specifically mentioned in the John Quiggin quote which constitutes the raison d'etre of this disscussion. This may be an obtuse attempt to redirect the topic? If so, you are unlikely to succeed and would probably be better employed in some other endeavor.
On the other hand, by "it" you may have meant the looting, etc. that is the actual topic under discussion. If that is the case, then you are quite wrong. The looting is exactly the disaster that opponents of the war (and proponents of the war who were concerned about the preservation of Iraq's antiquities) had warned about--as seen here and in other low-profile venues like the front page of the New York Times.
Please see also: Teresa Nielsen Hayden's post on reading comprehension,
Also, you may want to ask yourself, "if Barry called Instapudit 'the Rush Limbaugh'of blogistan' -- assume for a moment that Barry may not be a complete idiot and knows that that Mr. Reynolds and Mr. Limbaugh do not hold identical political views -- is there some quality of Rush Limbaugh's that Barry is ascribing to Glenn Reynolds?"
Hmmm, is y'all a variant form of you folks or you people?
Staff Sergeant B is promising that every Iraqi will be receiving medical treatment in 10 days time... Is every Iraqi going to need treatment by then? Is a "secret" plan being revealed here?
What sort of treatment will every Iraqi require, I wonder, treatment for burns, blunt force trauma, sucking chest wounds, lacerations? All of the above? Radiation burns? Propaganda-induced coma?
It is difficult to recall with any accuracy the prolonged state of shock and horror that clouded my mind on seeing Reagan elected, but I think it was actually worse than the numb, bitter disgust that attended the ascension of the current Bush.
The only thing as demoralizing and shattering to my fantasies about the potential of my fellow citizens was jury duty (about which I can only say god help the accused and the wronged, for the process assuredly won't).
Reading these blogs and comments is like finding an instant antidote... It's something like breathing at the surface again after a deep free dive.
I feel a need to express my gratitude for your (collective) clarity of thought, wit and imagination--and for the deft handling of the set of polemical techniques masquerading as an outraged person.
Light in the dark light... the waveforms don't cancel, particles don't anihilate...
Thanks.
Teresa-
The x doesn't swap--that's the address, Temple is a middle name.
I think you are wrong and here's part of the reason why:
http://www.free-lebanon.com/Editorials/Reader_Mail/archives1/readermail.jpg
http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1195000/images/_1195298_sahara1501.jpg
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2002/20021108/wd3.jpg
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2002/20021108/world.htm
http://www.megastories.com/attack/images/demo/coveredface300.jpg
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/cartoon_motion/picturestory/children/children-01.jpg
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/images/0222-01.jpg
But who knows, suicide volunteers holding the Koran in one hand MIGHT be flashing a peace sign and thinking about being cool in occidental terms...
Teresa, which body language are you refering to?
The V for victory sign they're giving stems from British military influence in the area (back when they were drawing up those absurd borders and in the era when the Desert Rats earned their name)...
Probably there's something else I'm missing.
Timothy and Bry's comments seem spot on. I particularly like Bry's compassion for the lost souls who confuse consumer goods and their manufacturers with culture...
I really, really like Teresa's initial idea, and part of it's appeal is that it's so ecumenical: the set of stupid people coincides with every other set of people. So recognizing membership in this grouping as more important than membership in or association with other groupings (liberal/conservative, nazi/commie, republican/democrat/green, etc.) would be very useful.
It's a little sad that the responses turned so rapidly to offensive and defensive positions along the left/right front... Our stupid people are more abused for their public imbicilty than yours! See how unfair it is!
Would it be more fun and productive to look at DeGenova (who clearly did mean what he said, if you read his clarification in the Spectator) and Coulter as members of the same group.
Then these Us Vs. Them arguments could turn to something more productive. Someone could say, "hey, one of you people (Savage/DeGenova) just said something stupid: see how stupid you guys are!" To which his ideological opponent would reply, "No, no (Savage/DeGenova) isn't one of us, hes a stupid person, just like (DeGenova/Savage)." Chorus:
"Boy, those stupid people sure are dumb!"
Then everybody gets on with something meangful, beautiful or useful... sorry for the unbridled fantasy there...
Jane Yolen -- I92m sure you could Articulate your thoughts better than Scott Martens, who92s argument is rife with error. I92d love to see your thoughts expressed in your own language.
Scott92s initial exposition is far from clear, but he seems to claim that I am arguing that the ends justify the means-- when I have done no such thing.
Scott then breaks into general comments about the common desire not to be ruled by foreign overlords and makes some remarks about misapplied utilitarian calculus (which I don92t quite follow--my study of calculus didn92t go much beyond integrals...).
After this mishmash, Scott makes some easily refuted assertions:
1) Cruel means lead to cruel outcomes. Scott seems to immediately support this claim by saying that others have made it before, and gives the example of simplistic arguments about revolutions that ignore cultural, historical and circumstantial factors that contributed to different revolutionary objectives, circumstances and results... You don92t have to read especially deeply into the history of these revolutions to see the fallacies in this line of argument.
Can you think of occasions when cruel means have not let to cruel outcomes? I can. Of course you get into a lot of denotational complexity, here: what do you mean by cruel? What do you define as an outcome? Avoiding the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy, how closely must a causal chain be forged to identify a situation as the outcome of certain means? Given a particular outcome, can you isolate the cruel means that seem causative from non-cruel causative factors?
2) WWII was the only case of a has war not leading to an equally harsh occupation... This is, of course, rubbish. History is rife with records of bloody war and occupation, often leading to relative peace and harmony. The various horrific, brutal wars of the Romans, for example--the followers of Vercingetorix had it bad during the war, but their old ages and the lives of their children in Roman Gaul were not only not as harsh as the wars that conquered them, but not as harsh as the ante bellum status quo... and the same could be said of Roman Britain, Greece and many other regions of the empire... Similar relative post bellum peace can be noted in the Persian and Chinese empires.
3) Taking control of a country by force means ruling a country the same way. Again, it92s not hard to think of historical examples that put the lie to this notion.
4) War destroys any alternative way of administering the state. I92m sure this only sounds as silly as it does because it92s inadequate shorthand for a more complex and rational idea--but that idea is probably wrong, too...
Well, this is getting too long... suffice it say that I don92t agree with much of what Scott wrote and find the assertions in his hypothetical post-war Iraq as flawed as the ones I discussed in this reply. If you are interested, Jane, or if Scott expresses an interest, I92ll happily post them, but I feel I92ve taken enough space already.
I am surprised that you found a reflection of your own thoughts in Scott's post and I would love to read your own expression of them.
Graydon,
Sorry, in the bit about the Germans not being a notably servile lot I was responding to CHip, whose comments I conflated with yours in memory...
In any case, the niceties of imposed order in Iraq will probably be eclipsed as a focus of attention as the US moves on to confront Syria, North Korea, Iran, Saudia Arabia, Yemen, Pakistan and other states in what former CIA boss Woolsey has called World War IV (http://edition.cnn.com/2003/US/04/03/sprj.irq.woolsey.world.war/)
It would appear that the Iraqi campaign is seen as the first operation in a much larger project which seeks to impose radical cultural change on a large multi-national ethnic group, so we should have a lot of interesting experimental evidence to support or refute the notion that such imposition is possible.
Charlie B. - I have to agree with Teresa --there seems to be considerable diversity of perspective and focus here. You claim that these comments all amount to an assertion that everything is George Bush's fault... but the only person I see making any claim about bush is Scott Martens. Perhaps you were already upset about something else and vented that feeling here?
Hmmm... Graydon-- you seem to say first that ending the power of tyrants is not something that can be done through war and then confirm that it has been done through war but that the conclusion of those wars also required draconian measures to remove, disenfranchize or kill the most dedicated supporters of the tyranical regime... Well, yes.
De-baathification will be required. Some of the professional torturers, rapists and street enforcers will have to be executed or imprisoned.
Your analysis of post-war Italian politics is deeply flawed. It's true that Berlusconi is a neo-fascist, but he was elected after many years of power passing back and forth between right-wing, centrist, and left-wing governments.
It's also incorrect to say that the German people were somehow imbued with a cultural passivity and inherent impulse to obey orders. The brownshirts would not have spent so many years in pitched battles in the streets, cracking communist heads, were that the case. The dearth of adult male germans after the war probably did make the imposition of liberal democracy somewhat easier than it would otherwise have been.
Graydon:
But ending the power of tyrants is something that can be achieved through war.
Italians, Germans, and Japanese who have lived in imposed Democratic regimes since the middle of the last century may provide some evidence that imposed social change is something you can do with war.
I think it is rather too early in the development of "this particular fiasco" to know if all Iraqis agree on what constitutes an improvement in the governance of their country. Some people, notably in areas where the Baath members and Fedayeen have been removed have expressed approval of the war.
Actually, it is possible to lay a little blame.
The tactics employed by the Fedayeen which resulted in the creation of checkpoints like this were predictable, and predicted. Given the likely need for checlpoints, specialized checkpoint units (perhaps composed of MPs) should have been taught appropriate arabic and farsi commands and signs in arabic should have been prepared. These units should have received realistic training culminating in execises with Kuwaitis playing approaching civilians and fedayeen in realistic conditions.
It could have and should have been done.
But, yeah- war is like this.
It should also be acknowledged that it appears that there is less horror like this in this war than in any conflict of similar size in history...
That's not meant in any way to suggest that the horror experienced by one mother in watching one child get blown to pieces is somehow reduced by the fact that it is happening less often than it might have.
Nor is the horror of this mass killing reduced because it happens in the same state where families are routinely tortured, raped and killed by the tyrant in power and his family.
But if you are categorically opposed to a war to replace this brutal, homicidal dictatorship, you must either agree that its violence and horror is not worth preventing or propose something realistic, other than war, that can be done to prevent it.
| Year | Number of comments posted |
|---|---|
| 2003 | 13 |
Total: 13 comments. View all these comments on a single page.
The most recent 20 comments posted to Electrolite by Adam:
Show all comments by Adam.