[lit-ideas] Re: A Genuinely Useful Thought
- From: "Lawrence Helm" <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 22:46:25 -0800
Andreas,
You keep getting me mixed up with the Bush administration. I see our goal
as combating Militant Islam. Baathism, especially Saddam's variation was a
variety of it is included. The Clinton appointee Kenneth Pollack in his,
The Threatening Storm, the Case of Invading Iraq lists a number of reasons
for fighting against Saddam's army. We did defeat his army. There should
be no doubt about that. So what beyond that is necessary in the war against
Militant Islam insofar as that subset of the war we call Iraq is concerned?
Is it utterly necessary that we leave a viable successful government in Iraq
after we leave? I walked downstairs to get some coffee a bit ago and Susan
had on Fox News' Hannity and Colmes. Hannity was saying how horrible it
would be if we didn't achieve "total victory." I waited to hear him explain
what that was, but he didn't. I was surprised by the look of anguish on his
face as he said it, but his guest Dick Morris then continued on with
something else and I went back upstairs. I think there is some truth in the
"if you broke it you own it" dictum. We should certainly do our best to
assist Iraq in building a defense force. We should help them get their army
and police up and running, but after that I think we ought to get out.
Every nation in the Middle East has insurgents, or at least a potent
Islamist anti-government presence of some sort, and none of those nations
are begging for America's aid. When we got there and toppled Saddam, a high
percentage of Iraqis were thankful for what we did, but time has passed and
a majority thinks they can handle the insurgents all by themselves. They
want us to go home. We shouldn't let their ignorance stampede us, but there
is no reason for our hanging on there any longer than necessary. What is
"Total Victory"? You'll have to ask someone else.
Lawrence
-----Original Message-----
From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Andreas Ramos
Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 8:55 PM
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: A Genuinely Useful Thought
Well, then, Lawrence, let's try this path.
You're right about Iraq and the terriers and the clash and all that stuff.
You got it right
on the facts, the logic, the morals, and the history. We had it all wrong.
How's that war in Iraq going? Total victory soon?
yrs,
andreas
www.andreas.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lawrence Helm" <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 12:48 AM
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: A Genuinely Useful Thought
> Well, you've repeated a number of your ideas -- all of which I've
countered
> with arguments based upon evidence -- none of which you have replied to,
but
> I see that when the mood is upon you, you can trot them out and take them
> once around the track while wearing a new fedora. Then of course there is
> the inevitable personal attack in lieu of argument or counter argument -
the
> sort of thing judy says doesn't go on. I wondered if you Lefties would
hold
> off making it sound like Judy was right about all these attacks, but not
so.
> Was it the scorpion who couldn't resist stinging the fox swimming it
across
> the river or the snake? I can't recall.
>
Other related posts:
