Krempasky.com

How about an early transfer of power?

In this corner – skeptic and peacenik (kidding) Dan Flynn (but my, doesn’t he have a nice website?). In this corner, Bush cheerleader Crowe.

On one hand, missing WMD’s is a problem. On the other – crap – *everyone* thought he had ‘em – and Saddam certainly acted as if he did. Not a real issue for me, I wanted him croaked on principle.

Crowe attacks Flynn, Flynn smacks back. It’s about this passage of Flynn’s that I’d like to weigh in a bit…

On Iraq, the American people blanked out. They liked the ideal presented–free Iraqis, destroyed weapons of mass destruction, a punished Saddam Hussein, a democracy in the Middle East, etc. The reality delivered wasn’t so compelling–more than 800 dead Americans, a terrorist Woodstock, anarchy, non-existent or unaccounted for WMD, etc.

When Crowe beats him up about the failed democracy part, Flynn’s response (in Crowe’s comments) was:

Your argument relies on this logical fallacy: for instance, by claiming that my post declares that democracy has already failed in Iraq. This doesn’t appear, so unless the content of the post itself proved too difficult for you to rebut there is no reason for you to take on arguments that appear nowhere in the actual post.

Sorry Dan, by using a rhetorical technique of contrasting what Americans liked about the war with the reality that “wasn’t so compelling” and use the term anarchy – Tom’s conclusion that you declare democracy failed is a reasonable one. In the two constructs, I would read it the same way.

All in all – I think that Flynn, along with those Americans who have changed their minds according to the polls cited, are making the same mistake. It’s been barely a year. One year. And for every beheading or car bombing carried out by some dirty Arab asshat – I’d be happy to share the emails I get from a dear friend working in Baghdad who only asks that her care packages include toys for Iraqi children, since they want to get to know the Americans more than anything else.

Come back and make the case that the fit has really hit the shan with the historical perspective of post WWII Germany and Japan and we’ll talk.

And as an aside, Dan is much smarter than this statement:

Tom, Iraqis aren’t free. Your statement is patently ridiculous. Iraqis are free from Saddam Hussein, and they are freer than before, but are they free like us, or Great Britain, or, gasp, Old Europe?

Sorry, Dan – I hardly think that Tom’s statement is “clearly or openly” ridiculous. How free is free enough to be called free? Is it the absence of secret police and rape rooms? The opportunity to go to school, especially for women? Is it the chance to speak to a journalist about those rape rooms and missing relatives without the fear of a similar fate?

Are they as free as us? No. Are they a hell of a lot more free than they were a year ago? Absolutely. Do they hold more liberty now than 1989 East Germany? You make the call.

Another example of the left dredging up and emasculating history for their own benefit. Thanks to Campos who sent this all the way from Saudi Arabia.

Just Like Stalingrad
If Bush is another Hitler, what words are left to describe Hitler?

BY BRET STEPHENS
Wednesday, June 23, 2004 12:01 a.m. EDT

According to Sidney Blumenthal, a onetime adviser to president Bill Clinton who now writes a column for Britain’s Guardian newspaper, President Bush today runs “what is in effect a gulag,” stretching “from prisons in Afghanistan to Iraq, from Guantanamo to secret CIA prisons around the world.” Mr. Blumenthal says “there has been nothing like this system since the fall of the Soviet Union.” Read the rest of this entry »

Pages: 1 2 3

And I’ve been working for at least a half hour.

Why do I have this energy? I have no earthly idea. But once the kitchen gets clean and the dog gets fed (and goes blessedly back to sleep) it just seems a good time to get cranking.

Course, before that – go read what happens when Hitchens doesn’t get his 2.1 litres of scotch. You wouldn’t like him when he’s angry..

To describe this film as dishonest and demagogic would almost be to promote those terms to the level of respectability. To describe this film as a piece of crap would be to run the risk of a discourse that would never again rise above the excremental. To describe it as an exercise in facile crowd-pleasing would be too obvious.

Considering Slate’s week-long hit parade beating up on Reagan, I’m glad they gave Hitchens center stage for his blast of Moore and his new movie.

Perhaps not a newsflash. I just received an email from these yahoos. They want to apologize to the world for Abu Ghraib – and do it by raising money to run television ads in Arab countries.

Yeah, show a lot of self-loathing hand wringing in a culture that respects resolve and strength. That won’t get more Americans killed…oh no. Bastards.