Barack Obama's debate strategy of portraying the Bush administration as a complete failure is running into one big problem: Bush's Iraq policy appears to be succeeding. How embarrassing! Well, at least the Democrats can try to make sure that no one finds out about this.
During his foreign trip, Obama tried to take advantage of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's statement that America should work out a withdrawal plan for Iraq. Obama triumphantly declared that now is the time for Iraqis to work out their own destiny. Obama failed to mention, however, that if he had been president, Iraq would still be ruled by Saddam Hussein. The only destiny that Obama would have consigned Iraq to is oppression, torture, and mass graves.
To understand what is going on in Iraq, we must distinguish between two approaches: the Bush doctrine and the Reagan doctrine. Unlike the Bush doctrine--which seemed to require invasion and occupation--the Reagan doctrine was one of assisted non-intervention. Reagan believed that people in foreign countries should fight for their own freedom. We do not fight for them. But if they are willing to fight, we are willing to help. And so in Afghanistan, in Nicaragua, in Angola and to some extent in Ethiopia, Reagan supported rebels who sought liberation from Marxist tyranny. For intance, Reagan supplied Stinger missiles to the Afghani mujaheedin who were fighting to repel the Soviet invasion of that country. Reagan did not, however, send large numbers of American troops to Afghanistan.
Now in Bush's defense it should be said that the Reagan doctrine could not have worked in Iraq. Unlike in Afghanistan, which the mujaheedin turned into a Soviet "bleeding wound," there was no Iraqi resistance that could substantially threaten Saddam Hussein. Bush's choice was either for America to get rid of Hussein, or to leave Hussein in power. But from the beginning the administration understood that, even in Iraq, over time the Bush doctrine must metamorphose into the Reagan doctrine.
It has taken longer than expected. But that's because Saddam's Baathist minority--let's call them the Saddamites--ran not only the government but the entire society. So it has been quite a process to train a Shia elected government to learn to govern a nation in which they were victimized for a quarter century. Slowly, however, the Iraqis have been rising to the task, assisted by able U.S. forces under the competent leadership of General Petraeus.
So now, finally, Iraqis are getting to the position where they can defend their own country and fight for their own freedom. This is what "success" means in Iraq: not the end of the insurgency, or the end of terrorism, but a situation in which Iraqis take the helm and America moves into a supporting role. Of course America is going to get out of Iraq. The only question is whether we will leave recklessly, precipituously, with the risk of escalating violence and chaos and perhaps even a return of the Saddamites. This seems to be the approach the Obama Democrats want. The other option is to leave cautiously, deliberately, in a way that leaves Iraq a self-governing society, the only pro-American Muslim democracy in the Middle East.
Postscript: Due to internal re-organization at AOL, it seems that this and other blogs are going to be suspended effective the end of this month. The blogs we have posted will still be online, but no new blogs will be posted. What a pity, especially as the election debate is heating up. I have enjoyed doing this blog and I want to thank my readers--yes, even the Dineshophobic atheists--for checking in and posting comments. (Sometimes I wonder if some of you atheists who post several times a day have regular jobs.)
AOL has informed me that the company is hiring a new blog manager and I will be negotiating the resumption of this blog--perhaps in a new format--with that person. This however could take a month or two. In the meantime look for my columns each Monday on Townhall.com and also consult my website dineshdsouza.com for forthcoming speaking events and updates.
Reader Comments ( Page 1 of 722)
1. Nice article with good points, Dinesh.
Thanks for the update.
Hope the re-nogs go well.
I'll be checking in every so often to see where you are ;~)
In the mean time, God bless you and yours.
Prayers and good wishes accepted by anyone and everyone; I'm going in for another surgery this Tue.
MI
MI at 4:35PM on Sep 27th 2008
2. All the best, Dinesh. We hope to read new ones from you again. Your best friends, the atheists, will sorely miss you.
JMP at 5:33PM on Sep 27th 2008
3. This is revisionist history. Bush said Saddam had WMDs; he didn't. Bush said Saddam had connections with al Qaida; he didn't. Bush said Saddam had something to do with 9/11; he didn't. Bush's analysis of Iraq's threat was rife with confirmation bias and was just plain wrong. The American people would never have supported an unprovoked attack on Iraq if Bush had tried to sell it as democracy building. At a trillion dollars and a few thousand lives a pop how many new democracies can we afford? How many "successes" can we purchase before our own economy collapses? Apparently the answer is one.
Even the so-called success of the surge is bogus. Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki recently cited 4 major reasons for reduced violence in Iraq. The surge was not one of them. And even he did not give the real reason for the decrease, namely that ethnic-cleansing had run its course. There was no one left to kill.
The Iraq war was the wrong war, in the wrong place, at the wrong time. The sooner we leave, the better. Throwing good money (and lives) after bad is a sucker's game, especially when our real enemies are prospering elsewhere. One of the presidential candidates knows this and it isn't John McCain.
Dennis Braddy at 5:48PM on Sep 27th 2008
4. Actually, as an atheist, I sincerely hope that Dinesh doesn't get a blog on AOL again or anywhere else for that matter, because he only spreads lies and idiocy about us. That's why we came here so often. To defend ourselves. So if he goes down the tubes we'll hardly be crying in our beer here. More like celebrating another lying voice being silenced.
Saint Brian the Godless at 6:03PM on Sep 27th 2008
5. Oh, and one more thing...
http://saintbrianthegodless.blogspot.com/
Hope to see you all there.
Brian
Saint Brian the Godless at 6:06PM on Sep 27th 2008
6. Yeah! it sure feels good to have voices like DD silenced - especially when they don't agree with people like SBtG and me! Yay!! :)
Doofus at 6:22PM on Sep 27th 2008
7. Dinesh, as usual, picks and chooses, if he pays any attention to facts at all! Clearly, "democracy building" was not what Bush sold to the American people to justify the war he wanted to highlight his term in office. 9/11, a true world tragedy, initially prompted him and the country to support invading Afghanistan, but really only to try to get Al Qaida and Osamma Bin Ladin. It was not about "liberating" or democratizing Afghanistan, except to the extent that Bush needed to disrupt the Taliban in order to try to achieve his real objectives. The Iraq war, however, was not only sold to us with lies and stretching of the truth (WMA's, Al Qaida connection, etc.) but it was massively misplanned with virtually no thought to what would happen after initial success of invasion. Needless to say, an opportunity to gain control of Iraqi oil, while paying off campaign promises to certain large corporations was a distinct "pot sweetener" for the current administration To even imply that any outcome of this war, no matter how large a surge or how long we stay, would ever lead to a "stable democracy" (of the type we generally mean by this term in the USA), let alone "the only pro-American Muslim democracy in the Middle East" borders on the ridiculous. Even Bush does not believe that this will be the outcome. It is probably true that no future administration can now hope to extricate us from this debacle quickly (note that in last night's debate, both parties admitted that we cannot stay "as long as it takes"), since any overly precipitous removal of American forces would lead to disasters of even greater magnitude than have already occurred, but the hope that the long term outcome of this war will lead to any "pro-American" sentiments in the middle east is clearly a forlorn one.
I will miss Dinesh, but only to the extent that his absence may force the regular and occasional Blogers who have sometimes congregated here to try to find each other elsewhere.
Harvey at 7:14PM on Sep 27th 2008
8. Saint Brian:
Actually, as an atheist, I sincerely hope that Dinesh doesn't get a blog on AOL again or anywhere else for that matter, because he only spreads lies and idiocy about us.
*******
C'mon Brian - haven't you heard that old saying about keeping friends close, but keeping your enemies closer.
Besides, where else can you go to get this kind of entertainment. *barumpa-bump*
Seriously, I'd have to say "thanks" to Dinesh. I've made some good online acquaintances via this blog. Learned a lot, as well.
Good luck to you DD. I can't say that I agree with you about everything, but your blogs do what they're supposed to do. They get people to post comments.
torquemada at 7:59PM on Sep 27th 2008
9. ATHEIST
Please post the name of the new blog manager at AOL.
We really want AOL to shut Dinesh down.
He was raised in India by Jesuits, and he feels he has the right to insult atheist.
Atheists are only about 5% of the American population, but we don't think we should be subjected to the rantings of a Catholic like Dinesh.
Dinesh... is trying to create more hatred for a minority group based on religious preference.
Please do NOT allow him to resume this blog.
William Hays at 8:00PM on Sep 27th 2008
10. 6. Yeah! it sure feels good to have voices like DD silenced - especially when they don't agree with people like SBtG and me! Yay!! :)
Doofus at 6:22PM on Sep 27th 2008
---------------------------------
It's not like that at all. People that disagree with me I don't want silenced. Hell, I'd like more of them to come and post to my own blog. But people that spread lies and further the cause of hatred, yes, those people I don't mind seeing denied their podium from which to spew their venom.
When someone like DD is silenced, it's a victory for the TRUTH. And I'll always celebrate that.
Saint Brian the Godless at 8:03PM on Sep 27th 2008
11. I agree with Hays here. I want to know who at AOL to tell not to renew DD's blogging contract here.
All his blogs ever were were slander and lies directed at atheists, liberals, and democrats. His strawman arguments made his lies seem more palatable to the morons that sucked on his literary nipples. People like him are a force for evil in this world, plain and simple. Because all they want is dissent and to drive a wedge between people. That's the last thing society needs right now.
Saint Brian the Godless at 8:06PM on Sep 27th 2008
12. Saint Brian:
Oh, and one more thing...
*******
Brian, your shameless self-promotion of YOUR blog on these web pages really makes me wanna...
help you out.
http://saintbrianthegodless.blogspot.com/
All of you saints and sinners are hereby commanded to travel thither or I will make living torches out of you.
The Inquisitor General
^^^^^^^
P.S.
Botts' too:
http://beyondbotts.blogspot.com/2008/09/narrow-path.html
torquemada at 8:09PM on Sep 27th 2008
13. DD your antiquated thinking seems to be popular with the republicans at this time. That type of thinking will be the main reason the Democrats will get control of the white house as well as the senate, and the house. As far as Iraq goes, it will end up with a government ruled by religion, and our nation will be much poorer in several ways for creating this unjust war. Thousands of lives lost, and millions of lives disrupted due to antiquated thinking.
Jerry Brown at 8:15PM on Sep 27th 2008
14. ATHEIST:
Dinesh... is trying to create more hatred for a minority group based on religious preference.
*******
I'm sure you don't have ANY problem creating hatred all on your own, Hays. You, I will not miss.
Sh!t, you're probably the kind of person only your mother could love.
torquemada at 8:21PM on Sep 27th 2008
15. WILLIAM HAYS' MOTHER
No, I don't!
Mrs. Hays at 8:21PM on Sep 27th 2008