Andy’s Sorry
By It’s posts like this that remind me why I shouldn’t take Andy Sullivan seriously, even when he agrees with me:
It behooves me to write that I’m chastened – and extremely heartened – by the progress we’re making in Iraq. The elections were obviously the key – and they should have been scheduled at least a year before they were. But it’s equally true that the constancy of our amazing troops, and the magic of democracy, are turning this long hard slog into a long hard slog with an end in sight. The criticisms of the past endure. But the fundamental objective seems to be within sight. The right decision – to remove Saddam – is no longer being stymied by wrong decisions. I feared the worst. I was wrong.
Fine. Whatever. If a bomb kills fifty Americans in central Baghdad tomorrow, or if Ibrahim Jafaari gets assassinated, what will Andy say?
The jury on the future of Iraqi democracy remains out. Andy is so bloody desperate to get back into the good graces of his readership that he’s willing to genuflect before the altar of George W. after a few fairly light weeks of insurgent attacks. It’s not just Andy; lots of people on the left have made the same error, just in the other direction. Few have bounced around as vigorously as Sully does, however. When a guy can’t remember what he thinks and why he thinks it from one hour to the next, it’s a great indication that he’s an intellectual lightweight.
Much more can be said regarding the other justifications for the war. We all know that the security justification was garbage. Iraq had no unconventional weapons, and its conventional force was extremely weak. Iraq had no meaningful connections with Al Qaeda or other terrorist groups. The United States is hardly safer now than in March 2003. 1500 Americans are dead, the US Army will be in Iraq for a very long time, the power of Iran and North Korea have increased, and the new Iraqi state is by no means guaranteed to be friendly.
It would not be too extreme to say that the Iraq venture has destroyed the idea of the humanitarian intervention. The most compelling study of Iraqi casualties suggests that the war to “save” the Iraqi people has indeed killed more than would have died under a dozen years of Saddam. The opportunity cost of the invasion was, in humanitarian terms, enormous. The financial and military resources associated with the invasion could have saved hundreds of thousands of lives in other parts of the world.
So, save your apologies for those who deserve them, Andy.