"Alas, to wear the mantle of Galileo it is not enough that you be persecuted by an unkind establishment, you must also be right."
---Robert Park
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MentalBlocks
Throwing Mental Blocks at Glass Constructions
|
|
|
Monday, October 13, 2003
Belmont Club has information about plans for a mass-poisoning attack by Al-Qaeda.
10:02 AM
Sunday, October 12, 2003
Thomas Friedman, no friend of the Bush Administration, has some questions for anyone who supports the most recent U.N. proposals about Iraq.
As a precondition for helping us in Iraq, the U.N. is demanding that the U.S. hand over "early sovereignty" to an interim Iraqi government and then let those Iraqis invite in the U.N. to oversee their transition to constitution-writing and elections. I too would like to see Iraqis given more control faster and the U.N. more involved. But people are tossing around this idea without answering some hard questions first.
Would the U.S. handing power to an interim Iraqi government really stop the attacks on U.S. forces, Iraqi police, the U.N. and Iraq's interim leaders? I doubt it. These attackers don't want Iraqis to rule themselves, these attackers want to rule Iraqis. Why do you think the attackers never identify themselves or their politics? Because they are largely diehard Baathists who want to restore the old order they dominated and will kill anyone in the way. Will the U.N., which has basically left Iraq, not flee again when its officials get attacked again — which will happen even after Iraqis have sovereignty? Could the Iraqi Governing Council agree now on who should lead an interim government? Will the Europeans really pony up troops and billions of dollars for Iraq, if the U.S. hands the keys to an Iraqi interim government? Will the U.S. public want to stay involved then, as is needed?
I, too, would like to see these questions answered. But then, I've been asking similar questions of my leftist friends for the last two years, and have not once received an answer, even from the most thoughtful of them. There is no alternative program for the "war on terror" from the left, much to my disappointment, there is only criticism, and it's rarely even constructive criticsm. There's value in criticism, but it doesn't give me any alternative to vote for at the ballot. We would be a stronger country if both parties had something to say.
2:00 PM
|
|
|
|
|