Liberals, please take note of the column that Ace called the “Best Essay on Iraq You’ll Read This Month. Or in many months. Read the whole thing.
Of all that has been written about the play of things in Iraq, nothing that I have seen approximates the truth of what our ambassador to Baghdad, Ryan Crocker, recently said of this war: “In the end, how we leave and what we leave behind will be more important than how we came.”
It is odd, then, that critics have launched a new attack on the origins of the war at precisely the time a new order in Iraq is taking hold. But American liberal opinion is obsessive today. Scott McClellan can’t be accused of strategic thinking, but he has been anointed a peer of Zbigniew Brzezinski and Brent Scowcroft. A witness and a presumed insider – a “Texas loyalist” – has “flipped.”
Mr. McClellan wades into the deep question of whether this war was a war of “necessity” or a war of “choice.” He does so in the sixth year of the war, at a time when many have forgotten what was thought and said before its onset. The nation was gripped by legitimate concern over gathering dangers in the aftermath of 9/11. Kabul and the war against the Taliban had not sufficed, for those were Arabs who struck America on 9/11. A war of deterrence had to be waged against Arab radicalism, and Saddam Hussein had drawn the short straw. He had not ducked, he had not scurried for cover. He openly mocked America’s grief, taunted its power.
We don’t need to overwork the stereotype that Arabs understand and respond to the logic of force, but this is a region sensitive to the wind, and to the will of outside powers. Before America struck into Iraq, a mere 18 months after 9/11, there had been glee in the Arab world, a sense that America had gotten its comeuppance. There were regimes hunkering down, feigning friendship with America while aiding and abetting the forces of terror.
Liberal opinion in America and Europe may have scoffed when President Bush drew a strict moral line between order and radicalism – he even inserted into the political vocabulary the unfashionable notion of evil – but this sort of clarity is in the nature of things in that Greater Middle East. It is in categories of good and evil that men and women in those lands describe their world. The unyielding campaign waged by this president made a deep impression on them.
Nowadays, we hear many who have never had a kind word to say about the Iraq War pronounce on the retreat of the jihadists. It is as though the Islamists had gone back to their texts and returned with second thoughts about their violent utopia. It is as though the financiers and the “charities” that aided the terror had reconsidered their loyalties and opted out of that sly, cynical trade. Nothing could be further from the truth. If Islamism is on the ropes, if the regimes in the saddle in key Arab states now show greater resolve in taking on the forces of radicalism, no small credit ought to be given to this American project in Iraq.
Read it all.
the list of evil countries is rather long, perhaps Bush should have begun with some of the smaller easier countries that way he might have been able to accomplish something within the 8 years allotted to him
Iraqi wacki Saddam Insane Hussein (same last name and middle name of Barack Q-Tips Obama)shot SAAMS at our U.S. fighters AFTER we liberated Kuwait in the first Gulf War while we patrolled the No-Fly Zone (32nd-36th parallels) and this was an ACT OF WAR…and 17 UN resolutions later that Sadist Hussein ignored, in a post 9-11 islamofascist war against all Crusaders, Jews and our Allies (February 1998 Osama bin Laden declaration in England)… WE GOT HIM, and his two perverted thug sons! Nazi Adolf Hitler is no longer around and Soviet Stalin isn’t either. Too bad, eh?
PS: Comrade Ryan forgot to add the 19 blue states of socialism to the Axis of Evil and TURD world countries that chant “DEATH TO AMERICA” daily!
The truth hurts, eh? Back to planting my VICTORY GARDEN 2008-2016!