Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
Iraq: Why I still believe in the war
Posted by: McQ on Wednesday, May 24, 2006

This is by Lyn Chu who holds a J.D from the University of Chicago Law School, is admitted to the New York Bar, and is a very successful literary agent. Not exactly where you'd expect something like this to originate. Found on Bruce Kessler's "Democracy Project".

It's quite long so I'm going to put hide it in an excerpt, but it is quite an interesting list:

Show/Hide
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
Well, I still believe in the war, but I don’t believe a good number of things on that list.
 
Written By: OrneryWP
URL: http://
Well, I still believe in the war, but I don’t believe a good number of things on that list.
Fair enough. I had thought that a good many people on the left would have agreed on many of these points. Perhaps they do, but the agreement is buried under the "it’s all about the oil" complaints.

I’m sure MK will be by shortly.
 
Written By: Mark A. Flacy
URL: http://
Well, I still believe in the war, but I don’t believe a good number of things on that list.
I don’t necessarily agree with many of them either but I thought it was an interesting list to put up here, more for reaction than anything else.

 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
I’m not particularly impressed. There are much better arguments to be found regarding continued support of the Iraq war. This just comes off as a collection of old soundbites. I’m almost tempted to do a line by line rebuttal, but it hardly seems worth the effort.
 
Written By: Rosensteel
URL: http://
Thank you; fantastic list.

How simple to diss it as a collection of old soundbites. Correct soundbites, my friend, not the least of which was this one:

Because the carping elite are hypocrites about all of this, but love to second-guess and criticize.

Bitch and moan, bitch and moan, bitch and moan. Then make snap judgments, all in preparation of more bitching and moaning. Given the newness of this 24/7 news cycle, and the willingness of the Democrats to shout "Civil War" since the conflict began, this administration has done one hell of a job transforming our military and handling this war at the same time. All while being savagely undercut by some in the CIA and the State Department.
 
Written By: RattlerGator
URL: http://www.englishandwhite.com/rattler_gator_blog
I think you’ve done been had McQ - this list has got to be some kind of joke. How else to explain the number of lies, half-truths, cliches, and distortions?

Take this one for example:
Because the war and rebuilding can be self-financing with oil.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha.

As the authoress herself says:
Because lies however big, are only temporary.
Amen to that sister.

But this one I agree with:
Because dictators are easier to topple than covert networks
Exactly.
 
Written By: mkultra
URL: http://
I think you’ve done been had McQ - this list has got to be some kind of joke. How else to explain the number of lies, half-truths, cliches, and distortions?
Heh ... right on cue.

It’s like hunting with a baited trap.

Like I said ... reaction.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
This list is, if anything, comprehensive. Something for everyone.

At least MK would ’fess to at least this one:
Because dictators are easier to topple than covert networks

I think that’s a pretty good reason, and if MK could see in in context it might have some impact on it’s otherwise blinkered thinking.
 
Written By: equitus
URL: http://
Like I said ... reaction.
I believe, in your case, the precise term is reactionary. I notice you do not disclaim the authoress’s notion that the war is pragmatic because it will be paid for by oil revenues. You had the chance. I understand that given your intellectual akwardness, you can’t.

As Fleetwood Mac said, don’t stop beliveing in tomorrow.

Your punditry - if it can be called that - is fast transforming itself into farce.
At least MK would ’fess to at least this one:
Because dictators are easier to topple than covert networks
Yes. That is why George Bush decided to attack Iraq, which had nothing to do with 9/11. Saddam was cornered. We had him hemmed in for little cost. Our military was so damm effective during the "no fly" zone period of time. We had Saddam hemmed in precisely because the military was so effective.

OTOH, McQ and his ilk like to badmouth the military’s effort at enforcing the no fly zone. The decision to invade Iraq is premised on the notion that the US military could not effectively contain Saddam. History, of course, shows that we did contain him. The military did a great job. Bush ignored this history.

Here is what the authoress McQ quoted had to say about our efforts at containing Saddam:
Because containment is impossible in a globalized world.
Contrary to this notion, our military was kicking Saddam’s a** in the 90’s. The traitor that McQ quotes says otherwise. I disagree. We had Saddam hemmed in. Why? Because we have a great military.

A message to Ms. Chu: Quit badmouthing our military. McQ: Quit quoting people who criticize our efforts in the 90’s to contain Saddam for your partisan purposes.


 
Written By: mkultra
URL: http://
I believe, in your case, the precise term is reactionary. I notice you do not disclaim the authoress’s notion that the war is pragmatic because it will be paid for by oil revenues. You had the chance. I understand that given your intellectual akwardness, you can’t.
Grow up MK. I didn’t claim or "disclaim" anything.

I put the list up for commentary and reaction. And you, as usual, went over the top and tried to make it personal.

You represent very well the problems of the left and I appreciate you dropping by here regularly to reinforce the lesson.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider