I tried (unsuccesfully) to post this a few weeks ago.  It is still relevant to 
the current discussion.

In George (the eminantly conservative) Will's column in this months
Newsweek:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15460708/site/newsweek/

Many months ago it became obvious to all but the most ideologically
blinkered that America is losing the war launched to deal with a
chimeric problem (an arsenal of WMD) and to achieve a delusory goal (a
democracy that would inspire emulation, transforming the region). Last
week the president retired his mantra "stay the course" because it
does not do justice to the nimbleness and subtlety of U.S. tactics for
winning the war.

<snip>

In a recent interview with Vice President Cheney, Time magazine asked,
"If you had to take back any one thing you'd said about Iraq, what
would it be?" Selecting from what one hopes is a very long list,
Cheney replied: "I thought that the elections that we went through in
'05 would have had a bigger impact on the level of violence than they
have ... I thought we were over the hump in terms of violence. I think
that was premature."

He thinks so? Clearly, and weirdly, he implies that the elections had
some positive impact on the level of violence. Worse, in the full
transcript of the interview posted online he said the big impact he
expected from the elections "hasn't happened yet." "Yet"? Doggedness
can be admirable, but this is clinical.

Anyway, what Cheney actually said 17 months ago was that the
insurgency was in its "last throes." That was much stronger than
saying we were "over the hump" regarding violence. Beware of people
who misquote themselves while purporting to display candor.

<snip>

Last April, The Washington Post's Jonathan Finer reported from
Hawijah, Iraq, on a joint patrol to search for roadside bombs. The
Iraqis refused to ride in armored U.S. Humvees, preferring pickup
trucks because a cleric told them that anyone killed in an "occupier
vehicle" would not go to heaven. Eventually, after threatening them
with jail, U.S. Army Lt. Aaron Tapalman browbeat them into Humvees:

"About an hour later, the patrol came across a white bag on the
roadside that Tapalman suspected might contain a bomb. When he asked
some Iraqi soldiers to move it off the road, their commander balked,
saying it wasn't his job. 'It is your job to protect the people,'
Tapalman said, increasingly exasperated. 'I can go and move it myself,
and you know what? I will, but don't you think your people should see
you doing that kind of stuff? Someday we're not going to be here
anymore.' The Iraqi soldier declined again, apologetically, and drove
away."

A mordant joke told during the Cold War concerned asking an Italian, a
Frenchman, an Englishman and a Russian to each describe his most
cherished dream. The Italian said, "I want my country to produce the
greatest artists." The Frenchman said, "I want my nation to produce
the greatest philosophers." The Englishman said, "I want my country to
produce the greatest parliamentarians." The Russian said, "I want my
neighbor's cow to die."

The joke was no laughing matter because it turned on this truth: A
history of brutalizing tyranny had stunted the Russians' aptitude for
collective aspirations. Which brings us back to Iraq, which Patrick J.
McDonnell of the Los Angeles Times covered for two years following the
2003 invasion. He recently returned. His Oct. 23 report ( "Into the
Abyss of Baghdad") begins:

"I keep seeing his face. He appears to be in his mid-20s,
bespectacled, slightly bearded, and somehow his smile conveys a sense
of prosperity to come. Perhaps he is set to marry, or enroll in
graduate school, or launch a business—all these flights of ambition
seem possible. In the next few images he is encased in plastic: His
face is frozen in a ghoulish grimace. Blackened lesions blemish his
neck. 'Drill holes,' says Col. Khaled Rasheed, an Iraqi commander who
is showing me the set of photographs."

Electric drills are the death squads' preferred instruments of
torture. McDonnell:

"One evening I accompanied a three-Humvee convoy of MPs through
largely Shiite east Baghdad ... The objective that evening was to
patrol with Iraqi police, but the Iraqi lawmen are hesitant to be seen
with Americans, whom they regard as IED [improvised explosive device]
magnets. The joint patrol never worked out ... The next night, an
armor-piercing bomb hit the same squad, Gator 1-2. A sergeant with
whom I had ridden the previous evening lost a leg; the gunner and
driver suffered severe shrapnel wounds."

For what?

***

Indeed.  John asked Nick to step into the shoes of the president.  I'm
wondering what advice John himself might have.  For what, John?  What
are they dieing for now?

Doug

-- 
Doug
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to