Sunday, February 15, 2004
So Much Nothing
Is it just us, or is NY Times columnist Thomas Friedman completely full of baloney?
His most recent column is as good an example as we've seen. As always he starts with an agenda and works his way backwards til he's filled a page--and as always he's about as subtle as a pro wrestler cheating behind the referee's back.
The tip off to Friedman's increasingly ham-fisted machinations is that they always have a faulty premise. This is because, unlike people who are using reason, he doesn't actually start with a premise but with a conclusion for which he has to construct a plausible beginning.
This time his agenda is to put John Kerry on the spot in committing the US to achieve Friedman's goal of continued military dominance of Iraq (and who knows how much else of the Middle East) through the device of an imaginary interview with Tim Russert. (What is it with Times columnists and imaginary conversations?)
The premise which conveniently requires Sen. Kerry--as a matter of grave importance, of course--to promise to uphold the war which Friedman hold so dear, is the notion that Iraq is at a crucial "tipping point":
Rubbish. The "Baathists and Islamists" won't stop when a government is established. They'll keep killing and wreaking havoc because they won't consider any government legitimate other than one that consists of themselves. The "Arabs and Muslims" who share their views will agree, and those who don't already know about their "lunatic ideologies".
There's no "tipping point". The people now killing anyone who cooperates with the US in Iraq will keep killing after a government is set up, and after we've left. They won't stop trying to destabilize the country, and they don't care what Arabs and Muslims who don't agree with them think. That's who they're killing now. And the sad fact is, a great many Arabs and Muslims in the world do agree with them.
It's a bad situation. One that many people predicted would happen if Saddam was toppled. But nothing about it requires John Kerry to assure anyone--not Baathists, not Islamists, and certainly not Thomas Friedman--of anything at all, let alone that he'll vow to continue to manage George Bush's colossal blunder to Mr. Friedman's specifications.
His most recent column is as good an example as we've seen. As always he starts with an agenda and works his way backwards til he's filled a page--and as always he's about as subtle as a pro wrestler cheating behind the referee's back.
The tip off to Friedman's increasingly ham-fisted machinations is that they always have a faulty premise. This is because, unlike people who are using reason, he doesn't actually start with a premise but with a conclusion for which he has to construct a plausible beginning.
This time his agenda is to put John Kerry on the spot in committing the US to achieve Friedman's goal of continued military dominance of Iraq (and who knows how much else of the Middle East) through the device of an imaginary interview with Tim Russert. (What is it with Times columnists and imaginary conversations?)
The premise which conveniently requires Sen. Kerry--as a matter of grave importance, of course--to promise to uphold the war which Friedman hold so dear, is the notion that Iraq is at a crucial "tipping point":
The situation in Iraq is fast approaching the tipping point. The terrorists know that if they can wreak enough havoc, kill enough Iraqis waiting in line to join their own police force, they can prevent the U.N. from coming up with a plan for elections and a stable transfer of U.S. authority to an Iraqi government. Once authority is in Iraqi hands, the Baathists and Islamists have a real problem: They can't even pretend to be fighting the U.S. anymore. It will be clear to all Arabs and Muslims that they are fighting against the freedom and independence of Iraq and for their own lunatic ideologies. Which is why they are desperate to prevent us from reaching that tipping point. Their strategy is to sow chaos, defeat President Bush and hope that his Democratic successor will pull out. Which is also why at this moment the most important statement on Iraq that can be made — one that could even save lives — is nothing President Bush could say. No, the most important statement on Iraq right now could only come from the likely Democratic presidential nominee, John Kerry.In case you don't get it, we're at "a tipping point".
Rubbish. The "Baathists and Islamists" won't stop when a government is established. They'll keep killing and wreaking havoc because they won't consider any government legitimate other than one that consists of themselves. The "Arabs and Muslims" who share their views will agree, and those who don't already know about their "lunatic ideologies".
There's no "tipping point". The people now killing anyone who cooperates with the US in Iraq will keep killing after a government is set up, and after we've left. They won't stop trying to destabilize the country, and they don't care what Arabs and Muslims who don't agree with them think. That's who they're killing now. And the sad fact is, a great many Arabs and Muslims in the world do agree with them.
It's a bad situation. One that many people predicted would happen if Saddam was toppled. But nothing about it requires John Kerry to assure anyone--not Baathists, not Islamists, and certainly not Thomas Friedman--of anything at all, let alone that he'll vow to continue to manage George Bush's colossal blunder to Mr. Friedman's specifications.
