Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Sunday Times: Weasel words on Iraq

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
RamboLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 12:53 AM
Original message
Sunday Times: Weasel words on Iraq
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2088-1669483,00.html

The liberation of Iraq from the murderous dictatorship of Saddam Hussein remains a good deed in a sorry world. As the silent witness of the dead in Srebrenica, Rwanda, Congo, Darfur and Zimbabwe attest there are a lot worse fates than to be saved by western intervention. But while it is one thing to defend the decision to topple Saddam, it is quite another to argue that every course that followed has been right. News reports show the daily horrors of life in the Sunni triangle. Revelations — such as our reporting of the Downing Street memo — have made it clear that the White House and Downing Street were less than frank with the people in the countdown to war. In this climate it is counter- productive to respond with Panglossian assurances that everything in Iraq is now for the best in the best of all possible worlds. The cameras and the documents may not show the whole picture but they do not lie.

This refusal to acknowledge reality has been damaging. If advocates of the war are not telling the full story about the post-war security mess, their words with regard to the bigger picture of the insurgency will be deemed to be equally untrustworthy. There were not enough coalition troops in Iraq in the immediate aftermath of the invasion. Security broke down and the insurgents were given a breathing space in which to establish themselves. But this truth is simply denied, persuading nobody. It adds conviction to the idea that the whole project is somehow illegitimate.

<snip>

In one sense it is understandable that neither President George W Bush nor Tony Blair wants to admit the grave worries about what may develop in Iraq and the huge difficulties in turning a country from three decades of Ba’athist dictatorship into a thriving democracy. Emphasising the positive is important. There are indeed strong positive signs. The economy is recovering. Much of Iraq is relatively untouched by the insurgency. The elections were an inspiring sign of the Iraqis’ desire for democracy, just as the development of an internal Iraqi militia shows that there is an appetite among the Iraqis themselves to defeat the terrorists. There are also splits emerging between the Sunni nationalists and foreign jihadists.

But to ignore the negatives is to ignore reality. Unless the failures are recognised they cannot be rectified and that means a further slide from a peaceable, democratic Iraq. Last week Joe Biden, the Democrat senator, returning from Iraq, criticised the “long litany of rosy assessments, misleading statements, premature declarations of victory that we’ve heard from the administration on Iraq”. His point was that the consequences of failure will be so dangerous that it is in nobody’s interest to ignore the problems: “The future, if it results in failure, will be a disaster.”



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
wtmusic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 12:56 AM
Response to Original message
1. "the idea that the whole project is somehow illegitimate"
What an idea!

"We live in an age of nuclear giants and ethical infants."

Gen. Omar Bradley
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lapfog_1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 01:13 AM
Response to Original message
2. The amazing thing is that we have spent around $13,000.00

for every man, woman, and child living (if you can call it living) in Iraq. Yup, $13,000 or about $60,000 per Iraqi family!

Every time I talk to a freeper about Iraq, I bring up this simple
math number.

-lapfog
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bahrbearian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 01:17 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. Yes but we only pay $5000 for a Iraqi we wrongfully kill
or $20,000 per family.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 01:23 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC