The problem in Iraq is that, we won a hollow victory. Defeating Saddam and replacing him with a new regime based around exiled Shiite political parties has a negative impact on America's strategic position in the world. Even were Iraq to grow substantially less chaotic over the next 2-5 years this would continue to be the case. The win-lose frame, while factually wrong, is also politically counterproductive. As Weisberg indicates, voters are reluctant to declare defeat for understandable psychological reasons. But there's no need to do that here. It's the fact of American victory that makes further involvement so untenable -- this is what winning looks like and, frankly, it looks like shit; there's no earthly reason to keep doing this; becoming "more successful" at backing the Maliki government wouldn't accomplish anything.This may be the most brilliant thing any Democrat to date has said about Iraq.
Thursday, March 8, 2007
Who Lost Iraq?
Matthew Yglesias has the answer: No one. We won. This is what winning looks like, when what you win is crap.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment