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 909 of 966)
13621. Would he just let them try to nail him up and let them figure it out when the nails kept bending? That's what I would do.
Of course they'd get suspicious when the scourging didn't produce any blood...
Heck, all Superman would have to do would be to levitate six inches and Pilate himself would have proclaimed him God Almighty, never mind the son of God.
Too bad Jesus had to do it the hard way. You know, the one way that had no chance of lasting, or of being universally believed. The old 'word of mouth among a select few' thingy isn't the best PR stunt.
Saint Brian the Godless at 7:36PM on Nov 11th 2009
13622. Fanman said "People DO know right from wrong; that's not the issue"
Yeah, so why are there sociopaths? Why do Italians not worry so much about adultery?
I would have considered it a GRAVE sin to have not been with my wife when she gave birth to our baby, but yet men of my Father's generation considered that day an opportunity for a second bachelor party.
People don't KNOW what's right and wrong, they are TOLD what's right and wrong.
The scales dropped off my eyes at 30 when I realized it was OK to not believe. You've never known such peace...
Ryan Anderson at 11:13PM on Nov 11th 2009
13623. Botts is a immature hater/know-it-none wag-his-arrogant-finger pointer - whose in denial and a mixer-upper of incongruent facts and Richelle is certainly far from being a(n educated and authentic) patriot - to the US, her own home country, or to others. Her comment bespeaks of either her deep naivete or her ignorance or her tepidity...
Or all the above.
What a joke....
MI at 11:22PM on Nov 11th 2009
13624. Ryan,
LOL! Truth be told: YOUR opinon of what's a grave sin's immaterial...
And, no, I don't expect you to understand this post for your arrogance is your greatest intellectual barrier to understanding.
Oiyez-vey...
MI at 11:25PM on Nov 11th 2009
13625. fanman: (13590)* appparently* Botts likes to think he knows more about your country than you do....
LOL!
Perhaps he's *intimating* that you socialized lot aren't as educated as he,the American?
And, so he, like an annointed messiah, is here to correct and "save" you??
(You dead-Palestinian follower you --- wink, wink)
HA HA!
MI at 11:35PM on Nov 11th 2009
13626. (C'mon, Richelle, it's time for you to give your little "shout-out" to Allah....)
Fanman -- do you, by any chance, happen to have a fire extinguisher?
Ryan, just skip this post LOL!
It'll make things alot easier on you ;)
MI at 11:38PM on Nov 11th 2009
13627. Richelle is certainly far from being a(n educated and authentic) patriot - to the US, her own home country, or to others. Her comment bespeaks of either her deep naivete or her ignorance or her tepidity...
Or all the above.
----------------
Oh really? How do you figure? On what do you base this presumption of my character? What from my comment demonstrates that I am ignorant or naive or tepid? What do you know of my patriotism and my supposed lack of education?
Richelle at 11:48PM on Nov 11th 2009
13628. (C'mon, Richelle, it's time for you to give your little "shout-out" to Allah....)
-------------
What in the hell are you talking about?
Richelle at 11:49PM on Nov 11th 2009
13629. Richelle,
I think you need to stick to the lighter topics which don't require too much thinking on your part:
(and, that goes to brian and ryan, too)=========
It's absoultely amazing to try and have a coherent discussions with "serious" people who seriously haven't a clue.
So, while it may seem that all might be lost == you probably should just a laugh once in awhile -- no grievious sin in it LOL!
http://worldmysteries9.blogspot.com/2009/11/13-amazing-benefits-of-laughter.html
MI at 12:00AM on Nov 12th 2009
13630. I asked you to explain how you came to your conclusion and you were unable to do so. You just went directly back to your implied conclusion. How does this in any way prove your point? Furthermore, how does this give any merit to your own ability to carry on intelligent conversation?
Richelle at 12:00AM on Nov 12th 2009
13631. Richelle,
Re-read some posts and go meditate on them.
Don't get frustrated; it's typical for an atheist to consider themself well read whilst not knowing what in the hell others are speaking about. Right there you proved my points.
Blowhard.
MI at 12:07AM on Nov 12th 2009
13632. No MI, I believe it is very important for you to support your arguments instead of trying to cop out just because you and I disagree on issues that have been addressed.
I think it's very unfortunate that you would insinuate that I am not intelligent merely because I challenged you on a few things.
Richelle at 12:16AM on Nov 12th 2009
13633. http://townhall.com/columnists/DineshDSouza/2009/11/12/life_after_death_the_message_of_evolution?page=full&comments=true
It would appear that Dinesh has accepted the theory of evolution.
He's still trying to shoehorn the supernatural into it, but good for him for at least TRYING to be intellectually honest.
Ryan Anderson at 7:58AM on Nov 12th 2009
13634. Atheist offers service to care for Christians' pets after the Rapture
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2009/11/atheist-offers-service-to-care-for-christians-pets-after-the-rapture/1
Hello everyone! This is funny I had to post!
goddess1prevail at 3:50PM on Nov 12th 2009
13635. I think The Onion has had the best response regarding Dobbs leaving CNN.
"Acting on anonymous tips from within the Hispanic-American community, U.S. Customs and Border Protection officials on Wednesday deported Luis Miguel Salvador Aguila Dominguez, who has been living illegally in the United States under the name Lou Dobbs for 48 years."
Botts at 4:10PM on Nov 12th 2009