Comments on: The Problem With An Inarticulate President… http://informedspeculation.com/2008/05/27/the-problem-with-an-inarticulate-president/ Refunds Cheerfully Given To All Who Disagree Sat, 07 Apr 2012 09:00:47 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: Pages tagged "inarticulate" http://informedspeculation.com/2008/05/27/the-problem-with-an-inarticulate-president/comment-page-1/#comment-517142 Pages tagged "inarticulate" Sun, 06 Jul 2008 00:40:51 +0000 http://decision08.net/2008/05/27/the-problem-with-an-inarticulate-president/#comment-517142 [...] bookmarks tagged inarticulate The Problem With An Inarticulate President… saved by 13 others     vingon15 bookmarked on 07/05/08 | [...] [...] bookmarks tagged inarticulate The Problem With An Inarticulate President… saved by 13 others     vingon15 bookmarked on 07/05/08 | [...]

]]> By: Mark http://informedspeculation.com/2008/05/27/the-problem-with-an-inarticulate-president/comment-page-1/#comment-503289 Mark Fri, 30 May 2008 01:14:02 +0000 http://decision08.net/2008/05/27/the-problem-with-an-inarticulate-president/#comment-503289 Well, Fargus and Ryan, you're half-right - I never entirely gave up on the war...but I did come close, when things were going poorly, so you can hardly paint me as an apologist. In fact, my position has evolved. I didn't reach the point where I could call the initial decision to go to war a mistake until sometime in 2007, probably (I didn't have time to review all my Iraq posts), and I also recall taking some flack from some of my then-regulars who have probably abandoned me by now for saying, when the carnage was peaking pre-surge, that we were getting very close to the point where the war wasn't sustainable and wasn't worth it. But the point is, things DID improve, and you guys seem to be ignoring the only real point I am trying to make - I'm not talking about the war in its entirety. I'm talking about RIGHT NOW. Does it make sense to stay or go at this moment? You have reached different conclusions than I have, and that's fine - I don't have any pretenses to omniscience. But my point during this thread has been a simple one - despite all the blundering, despite the initial mistake to invade on the basis of non-existent WMD stockpiles, the current situation is encouraging, and I think the correct current position is to stay. In fact, at the Swedish conference on Iraq today, here's <a href=http://www.iht.com/articles/reuters/2008/05/29/europe/OUKWD-UK-IRAQ-CONFERENCE.php" rel="nofollow">what the UN Secretary General said</a>: <blockquote><em>United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon praised Iraq for "notable progress" in meeting economic, political and security targets set at last year's conference. "If we had to use one word to describe the situation in Iraq today I would choose ... hope," he said.</em></blockquote> The one word he chose to describe the situation in Iraq was...hope. That's a powerful statement and quite encouraging... Well, Fargus and Ryan, you’re half-right – I never entirely gave up on the war…but I did come close, when things were going poorly, so you can hardly paint me as an apologist. In fact, my position has evolved. I didn’t reach the point where I could call the initial decision to go to war a mistake until sometime in 2007, probably (I didn’t have time to review all my Iraq posts), and I also recall taking some flack from some of my then-regulars who have probably abandoned me by now for saying, when the carnage was peaking pre-surge, that we were getting very close to the point where the war wasn’t sustainable and wasn’t worth it.

But the point is, things DID improve, and you guys seem to be ignoring the only real point I am trying to make – I’m not talking about the war in its entirety. I’m talking about RIGHT NOW. Does it make sense to stay or go at this moment?

You have reached different conclusions than I have, and that’s fine – I don’t have any pretenses to omniscience. But my point during this thread has been a simple one – despite all the blundering, despite the initial mistake to invade on the basis of non-existent WMD stockpiles, the current situation is encouraging, and I think the correct current position is to stay.

In fact, at the Swedish conference on Iraq today, here’s what the UN Secretary General said:

United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon praised Iraq for “notable progress” in meeting economic, political and security targets set at last year’s conference.

“If we had to use one word to describe the situation in Iraq today I would choose … hope,” he said.

The one word he chose to describe the situation in Iraq was…hope. That’s a powerful statement and quite encouraging…

]]> By: Ryan http://informedspeculation.com/2008/05/27/the-problem-with-an-inarticulate-president/comment-page-1/#comment-503139 Ryan Thu, 29 May 2008 13:08:51 +0000 http://decision08.net/2008/05/27/the-problem-with-an-inarticulate-president/#comment-503139 Mark, I'm not ranting at you or even disputing your evidence. I agree that it is entirely sensible to say Iraq is right now in better shape than it was a year ago. I am merely making the same point Fargus is: you pick an arbitrary point (say, one year ago), notice things are improved over that period, and then declare, "Hey, we're doing a heckuva job". It's nutty. Pick other, equally sensible (arbitrary) points to start your trend and we look like the Keystone Kops. Only with, you know, more wasted human lives. Your position isn't argument; it's propaganda. The bottom line is that, when things were going poorly, you wanted to stay etiher because we had a responsibility to make things better or because we would make things even worse if we left. Now, when things are on the uptick, we have to stay because we don't want to ruin our good work. Exactly what would have to happen for you to think staying has become a poor idea? Mark, I’m not ranting at you or even disputing your evidence. I agree that it is entirely sensible to say Iraq is right now in better shape than it was a year ago. I am merely making the same point Fargus is: you pick an arbitrary point (say, one year ago), notice things are improved over that period, and then declare, “Hey, we’re doing a heckuva job”. It’s nutty. Pick other, equally sensible (arbitrary) points to start your trend and we look like the Keystone Kops. Only with, you know, more wasted human lives. Your position isn’t argument; it’s propaganda.

The bottom line is that, when things were going poorly, you wanted to stay etiher because we had a responsibility to make things better or because we would make things even worse if we left. Now, when things are on the uptick, we have to stay because we don’t want to ruin our good work. Exactly what would have to happen for you to think staying has become a poor idea?

]]> By: Fargus http://informedspeculation.com/2008/05/27/the-problem-with-an-inarticulate-president/comment-page-1/#comment-503120 Fargus Thu, 29 May 2008 11:04:43 +0000 http://decision08.net/2008/05/27/the-problem-with-an-inarticulate-president/#comment-503120 But you were in favor of staying when the trend was very different from what it is now. How am I supposed to take you at your word on these motives? But you were in favor of staying when the trend was very different from what it is now. How am I supposed to take you at your word on these motives?

]]> By: Mark http://informedspeculation.com/2008/05/27/the-problem-with-an-inarticulate-president/comment-page-1/#comment-503062 Mark Thu, 29 May 2008 03:44:49 +0000 http://decision08.net/2008/05/27/the-problem-with-an-inarticulate-president/#comment-503062 Never claimed any of those things, if you'll look back at this carefully and read all the previous comments and the post. What I DID say was that, given the relatively low current casualty level, and the trend of improvement, I'm in favor of maintaining a presence, thought not indefinitely...I've been careful from the beginning of this thread to stress that I'm not making any large claims about whether the war was worth it from the beginning, but rather talking about what I favor for the present time...I also was very explicit in saying that the decision to invade was a mistake. In my opinion, pulling out now, given the present situation, would be another mistake. We can't stay forever, but we can stay for now (again, with the caveat that our presence will have to be a smaller one sooner rather than later)... Never claimed any of those things, if you’ll look back at this carefully and read all the previous comments and the post. What I DID say was that, given the relatively low current casualty level, and the trend of improvement, I’m in favor of maintaining a presence, thought not indefinitely…I’ve been careful from the beginning of this thread to stress that I’m not making any large claims about whether the war was worth it from the beginning, but rather talking about what I favor for the present time…I also was very explicit in saying that the decision to invade was a mistake.

In my opinion, pulling out now, given the present situation, would be another mistake. We can’t stay forever, but we can stay for now (again, with the caveat that our presence will have to be a smaller one sooner rather than later)…

]]> By: Fargus http://informedspeculation.com/2008/05/27/the-problem-with-an-inarticulate-president/comment-page-1/#comment-503057 Fargus Thu, 29 May 2008 03:19:46 +0000 http://decision08.net/2008/05/27/the-problem-with-an-inarticulate-president/#comment-503057 Point is, though, Mark, why do we just have to look at the recent trend? And what about history tells us that that recent trend can be extrapolated directly to a free and Democratic US-friendly Iraq by sheer power of American will? Point is, though, Mark, why do we just have to look at the recent trend? And what about history tells us that that recent trend can be extrapolated directly to a free and Democratic US-friendly Iraq by sheer power of American will?

]]> By: Mark http://informedspeculation.com/2008/05/27/the-problem-with-an-inarticulate-president/comment-page-1/#comment-503029 Mark Thu, 29 May 2008 00:06:22 +0000 http://decision08.net/2008/05/27/the-problem-with-an-inarticulate-president/#comment-503029 Ryan, I supplied no evidence that Iraq was improving - rather, I linked to evidence presented by the Brookings Institution that is extremely comprehensive and well-sourced. Can you dispute a single figure in the Brookings Institution Iraq Index? If so, please provide page number, alternate source of data, and confidence level in the results. I'm not interested in rants, but evidence...but first you'll have to actually read the report. If you do, you might be surprised at the difference now and twelve months ago...I never said Iraq was 'better' than before the war (though in some measures they are, and in some measures they're quite a bit worse off). I said the recent trend was improvement. If you deny that, then you are truly blinded by your hatred of Bush. You don't have to like Bush or his policy to admit that things have improved in Iraq as of late. You just have to look at the evidence... Ryan, I supplied no evidence that Iraq was improving – rather, I linked to evidence presented by the Brookings Institution that is extremely comprehensive and well-sourced. Can you dispute a single figure in the Brookings Institution Iraq Index?

If so, please provide page number, alternate source of data, and confidence level in the results.

I’m not interested in rants, but evidence…but first you’ll have to actually read the report. If you do, you might be surprised at the difference now and twelve months ago…I never said Iraq was ‘better’ than before the war (though in some measures they are, and in some measures they’re quite a bit worse off). I said the recent trend was improvement.

If you deny that, then you are truly blinded by your hatred of Bush. You don’t have to like Bush or his policy to admit that things have improved in Iraq as of late. You just have to look at the evidence…

]]> By: Ryan http://informedspeculation.com/2008/05/27/the-problem-with-an-inarticulate-president/comment-page-1/#comment-502954 Ryan Wed, 28 May 2008 18:45:43 +0000 http://decision08.net/2008/05/27/the-problem-with-an-inarticulate-president/#comment-502954 Let us also not forget Powell's transparently mendacious presentation at the UN. What's most remarkable to me is that, at the time, I saw the Administration lying through their teeth about the evidence, *knew* they were lying through their teeth about the evidence, but still basically believed their account. Even reading Blix's book and thinking in retrospect, there are plenty of reasons to believe that Hussein had a weapons program. Even without the kind of evidence the Administration claimed it had, I don't think it was incredibly crazy to come to the conclusion that they were ultimately not wrong about Hussein. The fatal error was in believing that it mattered either way, that we had some God-given (bleeeecccchh) right to decide a-legally (or illegally, depending on your perspective) that Hussein needed to be removed from power. We had and have no such right, nor did we have any understanding of what our intervention would do to the region. Less than two years after 9/11, somehow we still believed that we could solve our foreign policy dilemmas by sending an occupying force to the Middle East. The hubris is galling and embarrassing. Let us also not forget Powell’s transparently mendacious presentation at the UN. What’s most remarkable to me is that, at the time, I saw the Administration lying through their teeth about the evidence, *knew* they were lying through their teeth about the evidence, but still basically believed their account. Even reading Blix’s book and thinking in retrospect, there are plenty of reasons to believe that Hussein had a weapons program. Even without the kind of evidence the Administration claimed it had, I don’t think it was incredibly crazy to come to the conclusion that they were ultimately not wrong about Hussein. The fatal error was in believing that it mattered either way, that we had some God-given (bleeeecccchh) right to decide a-legally (or illegally, depending on your perspective) that Hussein needed to be removed from power. We had and have no such right, nor did we have any understanding of what our intervention would do to the region. Less than two years after 9/11, somehow we still believed that we could solve our foreign policy dilemmas by sending an occupying force to the Middle East. The hubris is galling and embarrassing.

]]> By: Jacques Distler http://informedspeculation.com/2008/05/27/the-problem-with-an-inarticulate-president/comment-page-1/#comment-502944 Jacques Distler Wed, 28 May 2008 17:59:00 +0000 http://decision08.net/2008/05/27/the-problem-with-an-inarticulate-president/#comment-502944 To my undying shame, I bought the Administration's line that Saddam had a nuclear weapons program. We now know that their evidence was <em>all fake</em>. There <em>was no</em> yellowcake from Niger (and they knew it). The aluminum tubes were unsuitable for making gas centrifuges (<a href='http://www.abqtrib.com/news/2006/sep/11/wilson-i-probed-iraq-proof/' rel="nofollow">and they knew it</a>). Mohamed El Baradei was right. And, no, Ryan, he wasn't even remotely a crank. Not a <em>single</em> piece of "evidence" presented in the run-up to the war stands up to scrutiny. That others (including various foreign governments) were similarly bamboozled doesn't let me off the hook. Nor does it absolve them. There were enough red flags (the Administration's equally concerted attempt to tie Saddam to 9/11 which, even then was <strong>obvious</strong>, transparent flimflammery) that I, and everyone else, should have been much more skeptical of the Administration's WMD claims. To my undying shame, I bought the Administration’s line that Saddam had a nuclear weapons program. We now know that their evidence was all fake. There was no yellowcake from Niger (and they knew it). The aluminum tubes were unsuitable for making gas centrifuges (and they knew it).

Mohamed El Baradei was right. And, no, Ryan, he wasn’t even remotely a crank. Not a single piece of “evidence” presented in the run-up to the war stands up to scrutiny.

That others (including various foreign governments) were similarly bamboozled doesn’t let me off the hook. Nor does it absolve them. There were enough red flags (the Administration’s equally concerted attempt to tie Saddam to 9/11 which, even then was obvious, transparent flimflammery) that I, and everyone else, should have been much more skeptical of the Administration’s WMD claims.

]]> By: peter http://informedspeculation.com/2008/05/27/the-problem-with-an-inarticulate-president/comment-page-1/#comment-502928 peter Wed, 28 May 2008 16:05:11 +0000 http://decision08.net/2008/05/27/the-problem-with-an-inarticulate-president/#comment-502928 The US did not intervene unilaterally in Bosnia. The military action was part of a NATO operation. The US did not intervene unilaterally in Bosnia. The military action was part of a NATO operation.

]]>