Pundits who screw-up: No big deal...
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...
Comments
You're analysis in Am con is almost perfect here:
"Israel’s 1982 operation to decimate the PLO in Lebanon led to American recognition of the Palestinian group, and the U.S. campaign to achieve regime change in Iraq and Iran could end up producing a détente between Washington and Tehran. Such is the irony of history. The Israeli invasion of Lebanon destabilized that country and energized its Shi’ite community in an anti-American and pro-Iranian direction, forcing Washington to rely on the moderate Arab states to repair its position in the Middle East. Likewise, the U.S. ouster of Saddam Hussein helped strengthen the position of Iran and its Shi’ite allies, including those in Baghdad. Since the U.S. doesn’t have the military power or political will to achieve regime change in Iran, it recognizes that it now needs to engage Tehran in order to stabilize Iraq and the Middle East." - If you just do some small editing it will be better and more to the point - For example, you wrote, "Since the U.S. doesn’t have the military power or political will to achieve regime change in Iran ...." This should be modified to be, "Since Bush no longer has the military power or political will to achieve orgasm in Iran ...." Overall though your essay excellen captures the ironic aspect well and that seems to allude traditional analysis. However - going forward, demographic trends in the region loom large too.
RE "...forcing Washington to rely on the moderate Arab ..."
These states - are they really moderate? Maybe you're just nodding to the convention - knowing your your blog - you know they are not moderate. You don't have to be a neoconservative to realize it's way too easy to be beheaded in these so-called moderate regimes -Maybe Bush likes that abouy them - but it ain't moderate. Incidentally - have you noticed the some of the neos going wobbly on Saudi post Lebanon debacle?
Halifax hotel | Quickbreads recipes | sushi rice