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 2 of 909)
16. Dinesh is a mess and I only hope he finds out what christianity is. Very few of my friends that call themselves christian really are, but the ones that really are christian, don't care that I am an athiest.
I wonder what will happen to all that money that people sent him? Any bets that he will run for the hills like most 'christian evangelist' ? (Yeah I know he calls himself catholic, ever see what your local priest drives? They steal your money too).
emanon at 8:24PM on Sep 27th 2008
17. Why.... thank you, torquemada. It's self-promotion, but I assure you (and everyone else here) that it's hardly shameless. After all, I feel like I know you people, and it's definitely shameful to be so forward in promoting my own blogspot to people that I like to think of as friends. I feel like that "Issac Asimov" asshole (or whatever he's calling himself at any given moment) sometimes with his evolutionblogspot thingy that he's always throwing in. I tell myself that it's not really as bad as that since after all this blog itself is going away, and that it comes as much from a desire to maintain contact with all of you as it does from a desire to have a sucessful and entertaining blog with my name on it. But it definitely makes me feel, well, somewhat soiled and pedestrian sometimes.
But all of you should still definitely go there and post your little asses off, no doubt...
:-)
Saint Brian the Godless at 8:28PM on Sep 27th 2008
18. Dinesh:
I've had a blast reading and blogging and will continue to do so, wherever you may end up. Good luck with the negotiations!
kulari94 at 8:37PM on Sep 27th 2008
19. Don't be so harsh with Mr. Hays, torq. I often think of my old favorite TV series Star Trek when I think of him. What would a Vulcan say if he or she were posting here? Pretty much what William says. And I can't seem to dislike raw logic, as much as it isn't warm and fuzzy. His disdain is perhaps too easily earned, but so (in a way) is that of a computer program when you submit data to it and it gives you the results, and you don't like them. It doesn't try to spare your feelings. It just tells you the raw naked truth. I see him as pure, somehow. Not what I'd call balanced, but balance is not necessarily the same for all people. For all we know he's deleriously happy in his real life and gives heavily to good secular charities, and merely allows himself the luxury of being so rigid here, where it doesn't affect his life in the least. I think he beleves that is does some Christians good to hear the absolute cold disdain that the purely logical mindset must of necessity have toward it. And for all I know, he may be right. We all follow our own path. Perhaps he feels that it's more logical and effective in the world to alienate 98 percent of people utterly if the remaining two percent are shocked out of their slumber. That to care about the feelings of the 98 percent so much as to not shock the 2 percent is sacrificing effectiveness for what he deems to be "mere" human feelings and niceties, and as such, is not the optimally efective path.
Or maybe he doesn't give a shit and I credit him too much for his intellect and am not subtracting enough for his lack of empathy.
Saint Brian the Godless at 8:41PM on Sep 27th 2008
20. Williams Hayes said:
"He was raised in India by Jesuits, and he feels he has the right to insult atheist."
I really don't get all the Indian comments. When the atheists and the gay rights people run out of
arguments, they always try to insult DD's Indian heritage. I wish I knew the heritage of Hayes, Tim and others - whether Scottish, Irish, German, Black or whatever - if people want to play that game, there's more fun to be had with any one those racial stock.
kulari94 at 8:49PM on Sep 27th 2008
21. Dinesh, you have interesting points for dicussion.As I understand you divide people in 2 categories good and bad. "Conservatives" (your type), no matter what they do are good. You even produce the whole mythology from GOD - Reagan to George Jr. Name of Reagan is saint. You even have 2 theories. It is very "scientific". I was originally from Russia (30 yrs ago). I cannot imagine how "grateful" I would be if somebody liberated me killing half of my friends and relatives. Our guy intentionally disregarded truth to push his God-given agenda, sacrificed a lot of people, stimulated terrorists in Iraq, did not proceed to terminate AlQaeda in Afganistan.
Who is this hero to do all this - just a guy, not God. And you must aknowledge at least that a mistake was done.Otherwise all your quasi theories do not cost anything. Ends justify means. Even if situation (ends) improves and really becomes good(means), "original sin" do not disappear.
Al at 3:00PM on Nov 1st 2008
22. I guess it's pretty easy to make fun of DD's ethnic heritage under the mask of anonymity.
kulari94 at 8:51PM on Sep 27th 2008
23. One of the most effective teaching tool is spaced repetition. If true, Wm Hays uses it quite effectively. He zeros in on the problem, keeps it simple , and hammers it over, and over. Long live.
Jerry Brown at 9:02PM on Sep 27th 2008
24. people run out of
arguments, they always try to insult DD's Indian heritage
xxx
I'll never run out of arguments, but his behavior just isn't typical for an american. his world is still divided into castes and that's evident in everything he writes. To pretend that he's in anyway mainstream american is about like me going to Delhi and claiming I'm a holy man. It's not just phony but sleazy phony, like phony and audaciously blatantly so. That's what seems foreign, like if he doesn't notice you won't eiter, but he stands out like Borat.
Clif Kuplen at 9:02PM on Sep 27th 2008
25. ATHEIST
You missed the point of the "Jesuit school in India" observation.
Jesuits are Catholics.
Jesuits are fanatical Catholics who claim to be intelligent.
Jesuits HATE Atheists, because atheists actually ARE more intelligent.
In the Book of Genesis, there are two creation myths.
A Jesuit LIES, and tells his victims that the Book of Genesis is credible.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article1647614.ece
London Times Online:
Pope’s remarks are made in a book published in Germany, Creation and Evolution, a summary of the discussion on Darwinism that the pontiff held last summer at Cas-telgandolfo, the papal retreat. He makes clear his belief that there is room for an explanation beyond scientific limits when discussing the origins of life and the Universe.
Last summer Father George Coyne, the Vatican’s chief astronomer, was removed after he lambasted intelligent design, saying that it was not science.
Father Coyne, an American Jesuit and director of the Vatican Observatory for nearly 30 years, had said that placing intelligent design alongside evolution was “like mixing apples with oranges”. He urged the Pope to withhold judgment, saying that he “doesn’t have the slightest idea of what intelligent design means in the US
______________
A Jesuit who tries to attack Intelligent Design loses his job.
Guess who kept their jobs? Guess who replaced him? Friggin' nutjob Jesuits.
William Hays at 9:07PM on Sep 27th 2008
26. Bush administration as a complete failure is running into one big problem: Bush's Iraq policy appears to be succeeding.
xxx
the part he copied from Obama is succeeding.
The surge on the other hand is stalled and is nothing more than a permanent escalation in occupational forces. The issue is that the neocons want a permanent presence there and the Iraqis want us out in 16 months. That won't fly and that's mccain's plan - borrow more from the communists and arabs to pay for endless occupation while Iraq accumulates billions more in capital.
Clif Kuplen at 9:24PM on Sep 27th 2008
27. Saint Brian:
Don't be so harsh with Mr. Hays, torq. I often think of my old favorite TV series Star Trek when I think of him. What would a Vulcan say if he or she were posting here? Pretty much what William says.
*******
Brian - you and I share a fondness for Star Trek. I've loved that show ever since I was a little Tellarite. But...
I knew Spock. Spock was a friend of mine.
William Hays is not Spock!
But, then again Leonard Nimoy said that he wasn't Spock either. Then he wrote another book saying he was Spock.
Who am I? Why am I here? Beam me up, Scotty!
^^^^^^^
And I can't seem to dislike raw logic, as much as it isn't warm and fuzzy.
*******
Maybe Hays is a Tribble?
LOL!
torquemada at 9:31PM on Sep 27th 2008
28. Dimwit has been smoking something funny again.
Geoff Barker at 9:34PM on Sep 27th 2008
29. Clif at 23 said:
"I'll never run out of arguments, but his behavior just isn't typical for an american. his world is still divided into castes and that's evident in everything he writes."
His behavior is not "typical American" but neither is yours, from what I've read of your postings. However, that does not make you any less of an American than anyone else, or Dinesh, for that matter. Lots of Americans share DD's views and are more divisive than DD appears to be. Be assured that they and everyone else who knows them consider them to be American.
To attack Dinesh's ethnic heritage because you disagree with him politically is reprehensible and you know it.
kulari94 at 9:46PM on Sep 27th 2008
30. Actually I'm going to miss DD too, even though I'm one of those rabid atheists he's talking about. I may disagree with DD on almost everything, but it's always good to hear another point of view. I hope you come back soon so we can argue some more DD!
mastersword at 9:52PM on Sep 27th 2008