Making the case for "To Hell with Afganistan" hawks

.












In the new issue of the National Review Richard Lowry addresses "The ‘To Hell with Them’ Hawks" who he describes as "conservatives who are comfortable using force abroad, but have little patience for a deep entanglement with the Muslim world, which they consider unredeemable, or at least not worth the strenuous effort of trying to redeem" and wh "want to detach Bush’s Jacksonianism from his Wilsonianism." According to Lowry, this "tendency is problematic and, in its own way, as naïve and unrealistic as Bush at his dreamiest." In another conservative magazine, I've discussed the rising anger among conservatives over the Global Democracy project here and suggested why the plans to "democratize" the Middle East are unrealistic and are not advancing U.S. interests here. I think that the recent I-cannot-believe-this reaction in the U.S. and the West to the news
about the Afghan man who had been facing the death penalty for converting to Christianity certainly reflects the attitude that Lowry is criticizing. As I pointed out in my article, most of the "Jacksonian conservatives" or Lowry's "‘To Hell with Them’ Hawks" supported Bush's decision to invade Afghanistan in order to capture and kill the SOB's behind 9/11 and not to spread democracy in that country. Now Osama and Company remain free and we're protecting with blood and treasure a country where converting to Christianity a.k.a freedom of religion results in a death sentence (and let's not even get into a discussion of Iraq here). What is the most amazing part of this story is that there hasn't been even one tiny little demonstration or protest in Afghanistan (or elsewhere in the Moslem world) against this death sentence (and there will be many demonstration after the guy is freed).

Comments

Frank Partisan said…
I found this blog surfing.

The coservative split is not news. The news is that it is more public.

The liberals tend to use old line conservative arguments against occupation as: it's not our business, too expensive, why pay for police in Baghdad when we need them in Brooklyn.

Regards.
12:27 AM
Anonymous said…
Plus it lacks a sea coast. BTW, I knew we would have problems when there was all that emphasis on dropping food in October 2001.
10:58 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Pundits who screw-up: No big deal...

Image
Matt Barganier desconstructs Andrew Sullivan's mea sorta culpa on Iraq in Time magazine (Sullivan seen above in a thoughtful pose on Bill Maher's "Real Time"). There have been many of those in recent weeks (including by WFB and Fukuyama ). In an commentary published last year, Oops! I helped start a War which was about one of the earlier apologizing-war-aplogists, I pointed out to the contrast between the way the losers who operate in the market (including financial analysts) are punished and the reality in which the losers in the political game (including foreign policy analysts) rarely get punished: Imagine: for a few years you were investing the money you had saved for your daughter's college education in one of those moderately conservative plans that provided some increase in the value of the investment without exposing it to major risks. But then your financial planner – let's call him Ken P. – got in touch with you and came up with a really great ide...
Read more

When will Israel attack Iran?

Image
I'm not an "Intelligence analyst" and I don't play one on television. But I urge you to study the following items: 1. Seymour Hersh new piece in The New Yorker, "The Next Act: Is a damaged Administration less likely to attack Iran, or more?" 2. Tony Karon's "Israel's Domestic Political Games Raises the Danger of a U.S.-Iran War." 3. Aluf Benn's "Olmert's Drums of War" in Haaretz . 4. Bush:I would understand if Israel chose to attack Iran. 5. Michael Oren's op-ed piece in the Wall Street Journal on November 16 which is only accessible to subscribers. So here are a few interesting quotes: Much like 1967, Israel faces a Middle Eastern leader who has repeatedly sworn to wipe it off the map, and to that end is assiduously trying to acquire nuclear weapons. Like Nasser, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad can cripple Israel economically by keeping it in a state of alert, driving away foreign investment and tourism. In the absence of interna...
Read more