A Cautious Man
March 18, 2005
 
Just To Be Clear -
I posted earlier about how the two foundations for the Congressional authorization of military action in Iraq were not supported. I received a comment which, in its own way, summarized arguments similar to those noted by the widely-read Professor:
WAR CRITICS want to mark the anniversary of the war -- there will be an "antiwar protest" at my local mall tomorrow and there are all sorts of events planned worldwide -- but a proper way of marking the date would be with a mass apology to the Iraqi people, and to George W. Bush, for taking the wrong side at a crucial moment in history.

Sackcloth, ashes, and signs reading: WE WERE WRONG, SORRY WE TRIED TO BLOCK ARAB DEMOCRACY, and WRONG ABOUT AFGHANISTAN, WRONG ABOUT IRAQ -- DON'T LISTEN TO US NEXT TIME would be appropriate.
But, that's misrepresenting the argument, isn't it? Remember, the tool of invasion was authorized, and justified, because of the WMD and terrorist allegations. Nobody said that we shouldn't work to change the regime in Iraq - but people did disagree on whether bombing the cr*p out of everyone there was the right way to go about it. If the President's main goal was reform of the Iraqi government, nobody can say that choosing war was the only, or even the best, way to go about it.

0 comments

0 Comments:

Post a Comment


Powered by Blogger