Saturday, November 18, 2006
Well, look who's divided now.
After a week of constant blather chasing chimerical divisions in the upcoming Democratic Congress, we are finally treated to a story of real division in the ranks of those who created the mess in Iraq. And these will be more than catfights among siblings, they are battling for the philosophy that guided us all into that disaster.
The arc of Bush's second term has shown that the most powerful criticism originates from the inside. The pragmatist crowd around Colin L. Powell began speaking out nearly two years ago after he was eased out as secretary of state. Powell lieutenants such as Haass, Richard L. Armitage, Carl W. Ford Jr. and Lawrence B. Wilkerson took public the policy debates they lost on the inside. Many who worked in Iraq returned deeply upset and wrote books such as "Squandered Victory" (Larry Diamond) and "Losing Iraq" (David L. Phillips). Military and CIA officials unloaded after leaving government, culminating in the "generals' revolt" last spring when retired flag officers called for Rumsfeld's dismissal.The finger pointing begins and they will hurl all manner of rhetorical bombshells at each other while Our Dear Embattled Leader serenely continues his bloody legacy in Iraq and real people die for puerile ideas and pusillanimous vanities.
On the domestic side, Bush allies in Congress, interest groups and the conservative media broke their solidarity with the White House out of irritation over a number of issues, including federal spending, illegal immigration, the Supreme Court nomination of Harriet Miers, the response to Hurricane Katrina and the Dubai port deal.
Most striking lately, though, has been the criticism from neoconservatives who provided the intellectual framework for Bush's presidency. Perle, Adelman and others advocated a robust use of U.S. power to advance ideals of democracy and freedom, targeting Hussein's Iraq as a threat that could be turned into an opportunity.
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]
Post a Comment