Skip to main content.

March 24, 2008

Purpose of war dictates who is qualified to comment

Tom Tomorrow is right on about right wing (and Democratic Party) "regrets" about war in This Modern World. For example, a commentator is shown regretting that the Iraqi people are "so thoroughly incapable of living up to" his "expectations of them."

That's all disingenuous stuff. But is there a such a thing as honest warmongering? Try this little bit from an American Enterprise Institute (AEI) session on Iraq today:

Fred Kagan: We're not in Iraq to help the Iraqis establish benchmarks. Our soldiers are in Iraq in pursuit of American interests. And that's the only measure, at the end of the day, that matters to me. ... It is an opportunity that we should seize.
He's saying that holding Iraq with troops is in our "security interests." The only thing he doesn't say is "by controlling the oil." But that's honest, isn't it? The U.S. obviously is not in Iraq for the common mythological reason that it is there to "help" the Iraqis.

These guys, like Kagan and Michael O'Hanlon, (link HERE to another choice bit from the same meeting) get full run of the media commenting sphere. While anti-war voices who have had everything right from the beginning are shut out.

Comments

No comments yet
This item is closed, it's not possible to add new comments to it or to vote on it