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 5 of 909)
61. Saint Brian the Godless
I have visited an excellent web site http://saintbrianthegodless.blogspot.com/ and enjoyed what parts I have read. I really liked the Jesus, and the dad thing. I wondered if you have thought that the God Jesus talked about, and the God the Christians talk about (except for Botts) seem to be two entirely different Gods? Jesus talked about a loving God while most Christians talk about a God that created hell for the non believers can roast forever, which instead of being a loving god is a God of violence, and torture.
Jerry Brown at 3:50PM on Sep 28th 2008
62. Saint Brian the Godless
I have visited an excellent web site http://saintbrianthegodless.blogspot.com/ and enjoyed what parts I have read. I really liked the Jesus, and the dad thing. I wondered if you have thought that the God Jesus talked about, and the God the Christians talk about (except for Botts) seem to be two entirely different Gods? Jesus talked about a loving God while most Christians talk about a God that created hell for the non believers can roast forever, which instead of being a loving god is a God of violence, and torture.
Jerry Brown at 3:55PM on Sep 28th 2008
63. I for one will be very sorry to see these blogs go.
It is easy to imagine that D'Souza's blog was 'taken over' by dissenters but it depends on how one measures 'success' of a blog.
I think that it is interesting to see the comments of those who agree with D'Souza although it is sometimes hard for me to imagine that there are folk out there who are so confused and can still manage to tie their shoe-laces etc.
On the other hand, if you imagine the 'average' Joe with his 'average' education and his 'average' family sucking on that 'average' debt-load, "God knows!" what the consequences of NOT being magical thinkers would be!
Does the average Christian go to an average pastor and PAY to listen to how there must be absolute morals and values and NEVER EVER think to ask for a list of these morals and values?
Apparently it is as ridiculous to want to peruse a list of specific Christian absolute morals and values as it was for the Mexican banditos in "The Treasure of the Sierra Madre" to have 'steenking baaaaadges' while posing as 'Federales'.
When pressed these lame-os will actually have the big brass balls to 'smug' something like, "Well there's that little thing called 'The Ten Commandments'!"
But since 'when' was it one's civic duty to 'not worship false images' and such in a country which has a constitution specifically separating church and state?
not-pboyfloyd at 4:44PM on Sep 28th 2008
64. While Mr D'Souza is on the topic of world history of the Reagan era we should ask him if he thinks the economic impact of our current 3 trillion dollar investment in the Iraq war has any corollaries to the claims of conservatives that the Soviet Union's expenditures on its conflicts of the period bankrupted them and lead to their downfall. Or is this another unfortunate case to which George Santayana referred? "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it".
Pliny-the-in-Between at 4:54PM on Sep 28th 2008
65. Thank you, Jerry. Glad you liked it.
Saint Brian the Godless at 5:31PM on Sep 28th 2008
66. This business of who is right and who is wrong is beginning to resemble caddy yammering that is clearly void of any logic. If you have 12 kids on a playground, who threatens to beat up five or six; the chances of their success is highly probable.
If you continue to invest more troops and money into an occupation, after it began to show signs of failure, the outcome of success are better than the initial plan.
I am not for or against anything any one candidate is saying. However, one has agreed that the surge is improving because of the aforementioned facts. Let's be fair. This entire blog is ridiculous and people tend to take them as gospel rather than search primary and credible sources to help them understand specific situations and what has been related in its entirety!! Stop participating in diverting the real and daunting issues that plague out society, write about something with more substance -- please!!! Be done with the brownie-points-scoring gibberish. Is this any different than what the speculators are hired to do on wallstreet??
Transcripts:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25872804/
…. And there's no doubt that we have seen violence lessen, our troops are performing in an extraordinary fashion. …..
…. Do you believe that President Maliki would be in a position to more or less endorse your timetable of getting troops out within 16 months if it had not been for the surge?
…..: You know, we don't know, because in my earlier statements--I mean, I know that there's that little snippet that you ran, but there were also statements made during the course of this debate in which I said there's no doubt that additional U.S. troops could temporarily quell the violence. But unless we saw an underlying change in the politics of the country, unless Sunni, Shia, Kurd made different decisions, then we were going to have a civil war and we could not stop a civil war simply with more troops. Now, I, I......
Lena at 5:33PM on Sep 28th 2008
67. Those who choose to belive in ,nothing,have the free will to do so..
If you understand the true meaning of Christs coming ..It was to save man kind.
It's up to you to accept it...He's not twisting your arm..He gave instructions to those he left to spread the word, so all may know that it ,IS, a choice, but YOU have to make it..All by your self and understand it's a very narrow road to walk.
But that is up to you...
So why does it pile on when DD has his views ?, You
Know in your hearts that answer...
It's too much fun to ignore the final chapter.
You have to look your decisions in the face.
And only you to answer them....Not DD.
So accept your right to be as you choose...
It's not for all of us....
Dorothy at 5:34PM on Sep 28th 2008
68. Dorothy, Dinesh is no good christian. He's a complete hypocrite, a liar, and a phony. I am an atheist, but I love the words of Christ as regards loving others. Dinesh is not on that path. He is on the broad, easy path. The one of egotism. Please read his posts carefully. If you can find one jot of real love in them, anything even remotely Christlike, I'll eat my nonexistent hat.
Seems like you yourself need to learn what the narrow path is. Talk to Botts sometime. Here's his blog address:
http://beyondbotts.blogspot.com/
Saint Brian the Godless at 5:59PM on Sep 28th 2008
69. And Dorothy, I believe in something. Not your God, though. Here's a recent post on my own blog.
-----------
Where Do We Get Our Morality?
Morality is doing what is right no matter what you are told. Religion is doing what you are told no matter what is right.
-H. L. Mencken
Fear of God is a barrier to real morality, not a path to it.
-St. Brian the Godless
I’ve heard so often from Christians “We get our morality from God.” In fact, it’s common to hear them say that atheists have no real morality since they (we) do not believe in God. They say that we atheists do not have consequences so we have no reason to be moral. That we believe in evolution, survival of the fittest, which they interpret as “nature red in tooth and claw” and so they assume that our atheist morality is based on survival and killing off the competition. They believe that they get their morals straight from God, and that we get ours from the animals. This allows them to see atheists in a bad light, as inferior to their clearly superior and God-Inspired system of morality. Which, of course, is how they wish to see us. Seeing atheists as posessing real morality is antithetical to their deeply-held belief that they are morally superior to us for their belief in God. And they need that belief. It’s what keeps their egos inflated properly.
Atheists argue that morality evolved as a necessary trait when we “went social” in a big way. When we started to live in tribes and communities and cities. We always displayed “moral” behavior toward our children and families as do many lesser creatures, but now it has evolved to also extend to complete strangers due to the necessity of living in close quarters to said strangers.
Perhaps. I mean, we certainly developed empathy as a survival factor, caring about others, being able to imagine being the other person, imagining looking through their eyes at their problems and situation. It’s an extension of caring for ourselves and our children. And if you’re truly empathetic, morality follows, unless you are unable for some reason to empathize with all others. For instance, if something blocks you, such as a belief that says that others are clearly inferior to you, are evil, or are otherwise lacking in goodness and rectitude.
Someone, a Christian, recently asked me “So where do you get your morality from?” and without hesitation I replied “From my empathy and my imagination. I look around me and see the problems that confront us and separate us and I feel the loss, the sadness, of all of us not being able to get along, and then I imagine a perfect world somewhere in the future where such problems do not exist anymore. Then I work backwards from there to here again and can thus see what is serving us now and what is not. For that perfect world to occur, we have to learn to love all others, accept all others, and empathize with all others without reservations. Period. It’s obviously the answer. So, there’s my morality.”
My morality is thus based in my empathy and my imaginative ability to see what we need to do and how we need to act, in order for the world to ever be at peace. I may have evolved my ability to empathize and my imagination, but my morality wasn’t so much selected for directly as it was a necessary result of those two things being a part of me already. My morality exists because I can empathize with all others and can imagine a perfect future where we all do, and cannot see any other way to get to that future but to start working toward it now. And I can see that it’s the only correct path. So could Jesus. Not so much many of His present-day followers, unfortunately. Since they believe that their morality comes from God, an outside source, they often cannot see any need to develop it within their own hearts. For them, the fear of hell is their morality. And fear-based morality is not morality at all. It’s obedience under duress. Not a fertile source for the love necessary to really be moral. But an excellent source for the egotism necessary to look down on all others and find them lacking. And that’s no way to Love Thy Neighbor, in my opinion.
http://saintbrianthegodless.blogspot.com/
Saint Brian the Godless at 6:11PM on Sep 28th 2008
70. So why does it pile on when DD has his views ?, You
Know in your hearts that answer...
-------------------------------------
When you were a little girl and your mommy or daddy taught you about Christ and God and your religion, when you asked questions (if you did; most children do) and the answers seemed to not make sense, YOU KNEW IN YOUR HEART THE RIGHT ANSWER. You later "learned" that it "made sense" after all because God works in mysterious ways, etc. That part was the lie. If only you'd trusted your heart. It knows what love is, and when it isn't making sense it knows that it isn't really love.
For instance, you're taught that God is Love, but you're also taught that if you don't believe in Him without hard evidence (like me, for instance) you're going to Hell after you die and are going to burn in agony forever. LOVE NEVER INCLUDES A TORTURE CLAUSE.
Why don't YOU have a look into your own heart for the truth of my words?
Saint Brian the Godless at 6:21PM on Sep 28th 2008
71. Dorothy, you say, " Those who choose to belive in ,nothing,have the free will to do so..
If you understand the true meaning of Christs coming ..It was to save man kind."
Well Dorothy, I believe that there are no gods, not even one. I believe that because I DON'T believe in magic.
I believe that the universe exists and that you and I exist on this planet which orbits the star that we laughingly call the "Sun hahahahaha!"
I happen to believe that you have the right to imagine that there is a magical being who 'created' everything magically out of 'nothing', and that it is YOUR JOB to worship this magical being for your benefit, 'everlasting life'.
I don't believe that you have the right to claim that the entire population ought to believe as you do or that the entire population ought to imagine that there are absolute morals and values which everyone ought to abide by even though you CANNOT LIST those morals and values.
Once again, the TEN COMMANDMENTS will NOT DO as a list of universal morals and values because the COMMANDMENTS specifically lists worshipping YOUR GOD as a moral and value which you have explained is MY choice to do or not using my free will that you imagine we all have.
You must be very confused indeed if you imagine that everyone is free to choose to worship your God or ... be demonized and called 'God-haters' and be invited to leave your free country and such.
not-pboyfloyd at 6:26PM on Sep 28th 2008
72. 6. Yeah! it sure feels good to have voices like DD silenced - especially when they don't agree with people like SBtG and me! [And WH --who says, “We realy want AOL to shut Dinesh down.”] Yay!! :)
Doofus at 6:22PM on Sep 27th 2008
Instead of rejoicing and bidding each other good bye, we should now think twice -- and compose a REQUIEM for the approaching death of free speech in America – of all places. For the fingerprints of the left-leaning liberal Democrats waxing in power and brazenness are all over the “market place of ideas.” They can’t endure any criticism -- more so when it is true. Desperate of winning the election at all costs, they are overturning the shelves, throwing away the contents, and shutting down the market place completely. The alleged AOL internet re-organization and the appointment of a new blog manager is nothing but a ruse to shut down these POPULAR news blogs – ONE CRITICAL MONTH before the PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION. There will be a new manager who will be the ultimate arbiter of TRUTH. Any posts that are LIES and turn RED according to his litmus test will be thrown out of the window. I doubt if DD will agree to this kind of condition in his renegotiation with the manager. Hence there might be a PERMANENT shut down. By then SBIG and WH shall have their INTOLERANT wishes FULFILLED. The new manager will conveniently quote SBIG: “When someone like DD is silenced, it’s a victory for the TRUTH. And I’ll always celebrate that.”
Not long ago conservative speakers were pelted and driven away while speaking in Ivy League schools and the Fairness Doctrine was thought out loudly to be revived to shut down conservative talk show radio. Still we cannot clearly descry the looming specter of Fascism that will ultimately DESTROY America. And we should shudder if we found out that we have blissfully installed these leaders who, in their grim journey to D.C., successfully jammed, stealthily evaded, and blacked out our radar screens.
Antonio Apostol Jr. at 7:23PM on Sep 28th 2008
73. Antonio; AOL is a business and is under no obligation to provide you (and I) a forum. This in no way infringes upon anyone's first amendment rights... chill...
Ryan Anderson at 7:53PM on Sep 28th 2008
74. The Bush administration will never be able to define what victory in iraq looks like because they keep moving the goalpost. We know what victory in iraq is, and we have not achieved it and never will. You cannot invade a country and expect to win if hundreds of thousands of civilians are dead or have been driven out and have not returned. If 4,000 soldiers are dead on the side of America and over 30,000 wounded...is this a victory? 12 billion spent per month to pay for the two wars. OUr National Guard, coast Guard and soldiers spread so thin that we cannot defend our own country if there was another hurricane or terrorist attack. The suspension of our civil rights and the passing of an awful Patriot Act...now tell me Dinesh, which of these results of this war is a success? I am quite confused. You cannot rewrite history to eb convenient for your horrible choice of having invaded Iraq.
Erik Earl at 9:26PM on Sep 28th 2008
75. "I have enjoyed doing this blog and I want to thank my readers--yes, even the Dineshophobic atheists--for checking in and posting comments."
Heheheh. Dineshophobic.
Yep, that's what most of us are. Afraid of you, Dinesh.
There's also those who are afraid of brain-dead hospital patients, and afraid of comatose nursing home residents, and afraid of those with frontal lobotomy surgery.
Goodbye, hate-spawning asshole. May your exit be permanent.
Godspeed!
brandon at 10:42PM on Sep 28th 2008