The question of what to do in Iraq today must be separated from the decision to topple Saddam Hussein four and a half years ago. That decision is a matter for historians. By any normal ethical standard, the coalition’s current project in Iraq is a just one. Britain, America and Iraq’s other allies are there as the guests of an elected government given a huge mandate by Iraqi voters under a legitimate constitution. The UN approved the coalition’s role in May 2003, and the mandate has been renewed annually since then, most recently this August. Meanwhile, the other side in this war are among the worst people in global politics: Baathists, the Nazis of the middle east; Sunni fundamentalists, the chief opponents of progress in Islam’s struggle with modernity; and the government of Iran. Ethically, causes do not come much clearer than this one.
I cannot understand how formerly idealistic liberals are so dead set on pulling out of Iraq as soon as possible. Is it really just because of who is currently in the White House?
11 responses so far ↓
1 Jason // Oct 11, 2007 at 5:35 pm
I am probably one of your more liberal friends, and even I know that we can’t just “pull out” of Iraq on a dime.
Q: was it a bad decision to go into Iraq in the first place?
A: Absolutely.
Q: Now that we are there, can we just pull out and safely (for the safety of the region, and the world, that is) pull out and go home whenever we decide?
A: Clearly not. We got ourselves into this mess, and now, as ugly as it is, we have no choice but to remain for the good of the world, until the country is stable.
There’s more to it, obviously, and I am sure you’ll have a lengthy reply, but duh. We can’t just leave.
2 pax // Oct 11, 2007 at 5:46 pm
See, that’s the difference between a liberal and a leftist. Liberals want a lot of the same things that leftists want policy-wise, but leftists also see America as a force for evil in the world, because they have no perspective.
FWIW, I disagree with you on question one, but it just doesn’t matter how we got here. We *are* here, and all that matters is what we do next.
3 Jason // Oct 11, 2007 at 5:58 pm
that’s my point. we can all disagree till the cows come home on why we went and whether it was a good idea….but it doesnt matter, like you said.
We simply can’t abandon it. It needs to be solved.
4 pax // Oct 11, 2007 at 8:47 pm
Some people disagree though..
“Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama unveiled a new comprehensive plan for Iraq on Wednesday that features a call to pull out all U.S. combat troops by the end of 2008.”
Miami Herald, 9/12/2007
5 Jason // Oct 12, 2007 at 10:37 am
I like Obama for his Charisma, but right now that’s about it. These people have to be realistic. It’s probably a scenario where just about every dem candidate (let’s face it, the dems are going to win no matter who they put out there as their candidate. they could put a ticket of me and a female chimpanzee and no republican could beat it) is going to claim to want to pull out the troops, but they will all go back on that promise once elected.
6 pax // Oct 12, 2007 at 11:04 am
You really think the Democrats will definitely win? I heard the same talk in 2004, and we all know how that turned out. The Republicans will be running as a change from Bush too, and if Hillary gets the Dem nom the Rep base will be pretty energized to beat her. Either Giuliani or Thmpson would have a real shot at beating either HiIllary or Obama, the polls are all Democrat when they mention unnamed candidates, but in head to head matchups the Reps aren’t too far behind.
I could see a Nader like situation happening with the antiwar base also, which would split the Dem vote.
7 Jason // Oct 12, 2007 at 12:51 pm
Honestly, I think most of the country blames the republicans for everything going on in Iraq and I think you’re going to see a similar situation that you saw with the last congressional election. I really dont give the rep’s a chance in 10 to win the election. I dont think Guiliani is going to win the nom, (he’s the only rep I would vote for - i saw what he did in NYC when he was mayor firsthand and i believe in him). And Thompson, I admittedly dont know as much about him as I should, but from what I know, I think he’s far too conservative to win over any of the liberals.
8 pax // Oct 12, 2007 at 1:32 pm
Yeah but you have to factor in the natural bias in that since you live in Chicago and are in the music biz, I’d bet that 90% of the people you know and talk to are liberals.
So is everyone in the media, you can’t take what they say at face value.
Bush’s approval ratings are low, but the Dem controlled Congress’ ratings are even lower.. I also think by election time next year Iraq won’t be the issue that it is now.
So if you really think those are the odds, how about a friendly bet? I’d put $20 on the Republicans if you’ll give me 10-1 odds, hehe..
9 Jason // Oct 12, 2007 at 1:38 pm
i am not talking about 10-1 odds ever again. I will however do a straight bet of a steak dinner at morton’s in riverside square the first time i am in NJ after the election…how about that?
10 Jason // Oct 12, 2007 at 1:38 pm
PS: GO CLEVELAND.
11 pax // Oct 12, 2007 at 6:42 pm
A straight bet doesn’t sound too appealing. It’s not that I think the Republican will actually win, I just don’t think it’s going to be a walk by the Dem.
Leave a Comment