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 6 of 967)
76. Dinesh,
Your well-written articles have been thought provoking (perhaps, this is why you have had such a consistent audience of regular posters)... I believe whether or not your positions were favored was not the main issue here; but instead, how we reacted to them was.
And so, as long as "nattering nabobs of negativism" abound to oppose the impartiality of truth, and to slander with vile utterance anyone who stands for it, there will a need for this type of platform to collect them so that they may continue to provide a sort of tragicomic entertainment for those who do submit W2 forms!
Respectfully,
ManOfMettl at 12:28AM on Sep 29th 2008
77. A client gave me DD's tapes "Why is America Great" (or something like that: Was several years ago). Those tapes turned me off to DD's because I heard things that made him not credible. Specifically,I heard a person unable to see anything critical about the US. He doesn't know the meaning of the term "blowback": How US interference in Iraq in the 50's and Afghanistan in the 80's, gave us Saddam (eventually) and helped create Bin Ladin's zealousness, not to mention how the US supporting the Shah's reign (and abuses) caused the hostage crisis. Tom Friedman's told a story about visiting Iran a few years back, detailing how he was universally treated wonderfully, when he said to his taxi driver, "Everyone I meet here has treated me so well when they found I was an America. Years ago the Iranians hated us. Why have Iranian's attitudes towards American changed so much?". The taxi driver said, "You [Americans] have left us alone", going on to say that the US was not meddling in internal Iranian affairs.
Ken Haley at 4:26AM on Sep 29th 2008
78. With the blog gone, who am I supposed to spew my harsh criticisms on now?
Mokele Mbembe at 9:25AM on Sep 29th 2008
79. Dimwit contends that if obummer was president that hussein would still be president of iraq. That is probably true but at the same time we would not have over four thousand americans dead and the country would not be in the poor house thanks to the moron we now have for president.
Geoff Barker at 9:57AM on Sep 29th 2008
80. Apparently dimwit is going to have some kind of surgery. Probably a hopeless attempt to find some kind of brain
Geoff Barker at 9:59AM on Sep 29th 2008
81. Thank you, Pliny, for posting about the financial downfall of the Soviet Union caused by a middle east war with Afghanistan. I've been saying the same thing for years now. IT'S NOT A WAR IN IRAQ. It's an occupation, with no end in sight, if you fly by McCain's doomed planes (He lost 5 planes in his illustious career). World-wide economy is hovering on disaster, and the billions continue to fly out of the US for an occupation.
Brian, love the website. Oh, and Antonio? Liberals are not the group that trods on the first amendment. That activity belongs to the christian and catholic right, with their censors and book-banner. Liberal MEANS freedom.
Dorothy, you seem to assume that believing in your jesus is the default position, and that non-believers "reject" the truth. Hardly. I've never seen a legitimate case for any supernatural deity.
Clif, as always, your posts are quote-worthy. How about writing a book?
Linda at 10:04AM on Sep 29th 2008
82. To those "athiests" that want this guy shut down because "he feels he has the right to insult athiest" and that the "atheiest should not have to be subjected to the rantings of a Catholic like Dinesh". Well, guess what?? You don't have to be! Don't come to his blog! That's a simple one! That's the BEAUTY of the internet. There are THOUSANDS of blogs on AOL. If you don't like this one, I'm SURE those that come to this post to meet people, and to talk about RELEVENT things won't care that you pass this one by. You must like it, or you wouldn't even be on the blog posting comments. Why waste your time?? You must have more time than I do to waste. It seems it would be best spent blogging on sites that only agree with your opinion, and thereby not insult you. Unless I am wrong, the first amendment gives Dinesh the same right it gives you and everybody else .... that is to post the truth as he sees it (and as a lot of others see it as well - your ideals are not the only ones out there! and just because you don't agree with his perception of the truth, does not make it a LIE - actually HIS is closer to the truth than yours). So just because you don't agree with him, AOL should shut him down?? I don't think so. I think AOL should shut people like you down, that DO spread HATE, but sadly, they have to give you the same right as everybody else & let you post too. If you don't agree with what Dinesh says, find another blog that praises Obama that you OBAMANITES love & post to adnauseam. Simply use your right and pass by this one because he doesn't agree with the Obama lies. Everybody has the right to their own opinion and convictions. Mine are different than yours, but you have the right to have yours as much as I have the right to have mine. Does not make mine wrong! THAT, my friend, contributes to people not hating. Not the stuff you spewed in this blog. McCain/Palin 08!
Angie at 8:28PM on Sep 29th 2008
83. Weird. My post posted, then disappeared.
Does anyone besides me miss rita and dina? No? Me neither.
Linda at 10:57AM on Sep 29th 2008
84. Now it's back. I'm in the twilight zone.
Botts, if you're there: how bout them Redskins!!!!
Linda at 10:58AM on Sep 29th 2008
85. Who said; "Parting is such sweet sorrow"?
fanman at 11:07AM on Sep 29th 2008
86. This is how the world ends...
Not with a bang but a whimper.
Ryan Anderson at 11:52AM on Sep 29th 2008
87. Hi Ryan,
One man's whimper is another man's ABOUT FUCKING TIME.
AOL, put a stake in this blog's poor excuse for a heart, please!
brandon at 2:27PM on Sep 29th 2008
88. Botts, if you're there: how bout them Redskins!!!!
Linda at 10:58AM on Sep 29th 2008
-------------------
linda,
i thought about you while danny and i were watching the redskins beat the cowboys lastnight. danny was disappointed.
and i think you're right, nobody misses rita or dina.
Richelle at 2:41PM on Sep 29th 2008
89. OMG BRANDON!!!!
i have missed you terribly!! i never got to hear about your proposal to your girlfriend!!
Richelle at 2:43PM on Sep 29th 2008
90. 82. Who said; "Parting is such sweet sorrow"?
fanman at 11:07AM on Sep 29th 2008
------------
juliet
"good night, good night! parting is such sweet sorrow, that i shall say good night till it be morrow."
Richelle at 3:02PM on Sep 29th 2008