The NY Times Most Definitely DOES NOT Get It
And that’s no surprise at all. You don’t have to go very deep into this Gail Collins special to realize just how morally bankrupt the once-proud Grey Lady has become:
The Democrats will not be able to savor their victory for long. Americans are waiting to hear if they have any good ideas for how to get out of Iraq without creating even wider chaos and terrorism.
Criticizing President Bush’s gross mismanagement of the war was a winning electoral strategy. But criticism will not extricate the United States from this mess, nor will it persuade voters that the Democrats are ready to take back the White House.
Let us be clear. The responsibility for all that has gone wrong lies squarely with Mr. Bush.
Excuse me? Repeat after me: ‘The responsibility for all that has gone wrong lies squarely with Mr. Bush.’
Astonishingly ignorant (and please, for God’s sake, enough with the Mr. Bush crap…this is not England. He’s the President of the United States, and he deserves to be addressed as such). Does ‘Mr. Bush’ (like he’s a freaking NY Times employee, or something) bear some responsibility for the problems in Iraq? Of course he does…
But to say he bears responsibilty for all that has gone wrong? How about the Democrats who voted for the Iraq Resolution? How about Donald Rumsfeld? How about the insurgents? How about the weak-kneed Prime Minister Maliki? How about al-Qaeda in Iraq?
If the Democrats listen to the Times, they’ll quickly go the way of the do-do. To wit:
The public deserves a full accounting (backed by subpoenas, if necessary) of how prewar intelligence was cooked, why American troops were sent to war without adequate armor, and where billions of dollars in reconstruction aid disappeared to.
Thank God we haven’t jumped to any hasty conclusions. Here’s an idea to spark a spirit of bipartisan good cheer: how about the NY Times giving Gail Collins the boot two months early? Because even birds would be insulted to line their cage with this pale ghost of a glorious journalistic past…
Ok, this gives me the chance I’ve been waiting for. Let me tell you why pulling out of Iraq one minute too early would be disastrous. I have a totally different take on it than anyone else.
It’s not that Iraq would degenerate into civil war. It’s not that the terrorists would win at least in Iraq. Both of those are likely and big reasons, but both are ignoring the bigger picture.
Yes, there’s a bigger picture. And to understand it, you have to understand history.
The United States has a big problem in the Middle East, but it’s not totally what most think the problem is. Most people think our problem is that we have so many people who hate us. Depending on whether you’re on the Left or the Right, you might have a different idea as to why they hate us. However, in either case, you’re wrong. Hatred isn’t the big problem. Trust is. The United States’ big problem in the Middle East is that they don’t trust us. Even our “allies” don’t really trust us, which is why they haven’t done as much to help in the War on Terror as we’d like.
They have good reason not to trust us, as we’ve proven ourselves untrustworthy. The people in the Middle East have long memories, and none of them have forgotten what we did in the late 70s in Iran. We turned our back on an ally in the Shah, and completely ignored him in his time of need. Both our enemies and our allies point to that correctly as a weakness in America. Now, was the Shah wrong? Was he a ruthless dictator in need of replacement? I’m not going to go into that here, but there’s no doubt that we could’ve and should’ve handled the situation much much better.
Our current “allies” in the War on Terror have not forgotten this, and each of them wonders every day if they can really count on the United States in time of need. They’re afraid to do too much to help us in case the answer’s “no”, because they also fear the terrorists, and have good reason to do so, knowing exactly who they are.
Our enemies have not forgotten it either, and know that they can use that as a recruitment tool. The United States is clearly the Great Satan. Look, they only care about themselves. They don’t even stand up and fight for their allies.
Iraq currently presents a golden opportunity for the United States. The best opportunity we’ve had in the Middle East in 30 years. We have the opportunity to prove to the people of Iraq, and the people of the rest of the Middle East, that we are trustworthy, and that we can be counted upon. Apparently, however, this is an opportunity that we’re intent on squandering.
And that would be the worst mistake we could possibly make. If we pull out of Iraq one second too soon, and prove once again that we can’t be counted upon, no one in the Middle East will dare stand up to the terrorists ever again. It’s not an exaggeration to say that the entire War on Terror might hinge upon the decisions we make in the next few months. If we pull out of Iraq, we might as well completely pull out of the region, because we’ll never have a friend there again.
Right now, we’ve just finished storming the beaches in Normandy. Do we press on to the Third Reich? Or do we load up the boats again and go home? That’s the decision we face right now, and there’s only one answer that offers any hope for the future of America.
This is such an eloquent, accurate analysis of what America may be willing to cede in order to, dare I say it, cut and run.
I read this earlier, went about my busy Monday, but couldn’t quit thinking about your comments. My generation has been through this once before and should be beyond being shocked again as we race to repeat another demonstration of fecklessness. We’re heartsick.
You’re right about there only being one answer to this situation, but how do you propose we convince the newly-elected?
Sandy,
Thanks for your kind words, and I apologize for not getting back to respond sooner. Life’s been a little busy this last week. Anyway, if you like what I said and agree with it, just make sure your congressmen know your feelings. I don’t know how optimistic I am, and I truly fear the possibility of additional loss of face in the region.