Month: January 2005

This is really shameful:

And that’s why I like it.

Mohammed’s day-after observations from Iraq the Model:

We here remain assured that we’ve put our feet on the right track and that the bright future we wish for Iraq has become much closer after the 30th of January but we all have to reevaluate our previous assumption according to the new facts on the ground in order to find the best way we can push the process to further successes.

Meanwhile, Riverbend doesn’t even acknowledge there was an election.

You find no larger load of crap about the Iraq election than this one from Kevin T. Keith:

So while there is quite a bit to be pleased about (no one should minimize the courage of the Iraqis. People literally died in order to exercise their franchise), this election was not a success, in that it will not produce a government that will be able to resolve the differences that hang over the country, and it will not produce a government that will be seen as legitimate in enough places to substantially reduce the violence. We are, in fact, pretty much where we were yesterday, with the possible except that civil war ? in the form of a lopsided constitution ? may be closer to day than yesterday.

This is interesting because I’ve read some things from this boy on evolution that were eminently sensible, so I know he’s not stupid. But like many on the left, he’s become emotionally invested in the idea that nothing good can possibly come from the liberation of Iraq, so he has to see a half-full glass as completely empty. There was heavy turnout in 80% of Iraq, and the Sunnis who didn’t vote will still be represented to some degree in the government.

You’ll probably find similar bitterness all over the elite, Bush-hating part of the blogosphere if you care to look; Duncan “Atrios” Black and the arrogant Juan Cole are in severe pain, for example. But I’m not linking additional examples because it’s just too pathetic. This was a great day for the Iraqi people, and the only appropriate thing for us to do right now is share their joy and give them congratulations.

Just to show that not all left-wingers are as bitter and blind as Mr. Keith, check this grudging congratulations from MyDD:

Of course, I know all that it is wrong in Iraq and what could still go wrong – Sunni disenfranchisement/refusnikism, terrible security, very high unemployment, terrible infrastructure, and so on. But for a majority of non-Sunni Iraqis, this election really does represent a step towards a better life, if only in small measure. What, after all, do liberals believe in? Do we not believe in the enfranchisement of the formerly dispossessed and downtrodden? Do we not believe in democratic elections, even if flawed?

And Marc Cooper is similarly sober in his leftist’s assessment of the election:

Those of who opposed this war and who want to see the U.S. troops withdrawn as soon as possible should unequivocally encourage the tenuous political process now underway in Iraq. We should stand for more and better elections, not fewer. We should be encouraging the writing of a fair constitution, an inclusion of the Sunnis into the process in order to reduce the violence, and a bolstering of civil society (as a safeguard against fundamentalism). If we merely write off yesterday’s vote as only potemkin or charade elections we take ourselves out of any serious debate and we degrade the legitimate aspirations of the Iraqi people. Indeed, the more one opposes the war and its pretexts, the more we should support the stabilization of a successful, pluralistic Iraqi state.

Those inclined to sentiments like Mr. Keith’s bitterness would do well to read these whole things.

UPDATE: Podhoretz notes the bitterness:

There are literally millions of Americans who are unhappy today because millions of Iraqis went to the polls yesterday. And why? Because this isn’t just a success for Bush. It’s a huge win. It’s a colossal vindication.

There’s a nice summary of the Iraq issues on Cold Fury:

Okay, look, I?ll put this as simply as I can:

1) Condi didn?t lie to anybody, and neither did Dubya. Lying implies both knowledge and intent, and neither has been remotely established, nor will they be, because they do not exist. We know that Saddam at one time had WMD?s; there is simply no argument possible on this. The fact of their existence was unquestioned by anybody, including the UN, after the first Gulf War, and we know he actually used them on more than one occasion. What we don?t know is where they all went, and if you on the Left were truly concerned about American security in the age of global terrorism you?d be a lot more worried about that than you are. You are not serious about defending this country. You are dead wrong, and you do not deserve to be taken seriously.

2) Bush acted on the best intelligence available in making the decision to remove Saddam from power; the same intelligence led President Clinton to make regime change the official goal of the USG back in ?98. You on the Left did not denounce that policy change when Clinton made it; your interest in the matter begins and ends with your hatred of your fellow Americans who happen to be Republicans. You on the Left are not seriously concerned about the security of this nation. You are dead wrong, and you do not deserve to be taken seriously.

3) WMDs were by no means the only reason to remove Saddam. Saddam was an avowed enemy of this country. He called for our destruction many, many times. He aided and abetted Islamic terrorists of every warp and woof…

Go see the rest of it.