Sunday, August 05, 2007
Michael Ignatieff admits he was wrong about Iraq
Sharper minds than mine can analyze his thoughts, I will recommend you give it a read. In a nutshell, he gives us a few paragraphs saying he was wrong and spends most of the article in the NY Times Magazine defining how a politician should think and make decisions. Along the way he drops a few scholarly slams on Our Dear Embattled Leader, everything he writes in this piece is in a scholarly voice.
My own personal beef with the Right Honorable Mr. Ignatieff is that he makes no apologies for his cheerleading of the senseless war in Iraq. The rest of Canada was smart enough not to touch Iraq with a 10 foot pole. A little remorse would help him greatly on his road to self understanding.
Good judgment in politics, it turns out, depends on being a critical judge of yourself. It was not merely that the president did not take the care to understand Iraq. He also did not take the care to understand himself. The sense of reality that might have saved him from catastrophe would have taken the form of some warning bell sounding inside, alerting him that he did not know what he was doing. But then, it is doubtful that warning bells had ever sounded in him before. He had led a charmed life, and in charmed lives warning bells do not sound.We know from his admission that he was wrong about Iraq, but as he has gone back to Canada and entered politics, perhaps he is making an effort to understand himself.
Michael Ignatieff, a former professor at Harvard and contributing writer for the magazine, is a member of Canada’s Parliament and deputy leader of the Liberal Party.For the sake of his riding I hope he is. However, for those readers not current on Canadian politics, the Liberal Party is on the outs right now.
My own personal beef with the Right Honorable Mr. Ignatieff is that he makes no apologies for his cheerleading of the senseless war in Iraq. The rest of Canada was smart enough not to touch Iraq with a 10 foot pole. A little remorse would help him greatly on his road to self understanding.
Comments:
<< Home
A fine point of Canadian politics: the style "Right Honourable" is reserved for the higher leadership titles: Prime Ministers (current and past) are so entitled to use it, as are Governors General (as the reigning monarch's representative, the ceremonial head of government).
Mr. Ignatieff, regardless of any ambitions he has, is only entitled to use "Honourable", as is any other Member of Parliament.
Otherwise, spot on on Ignatieff, our resident Liberal hawk. While there were a few who weren't "smart enough not to touch Iraq with a 10 foot pole", as a candidate for the Liberal leadership, he was especially prominent. This back-handed non-apology won't help his credibility.
Mr. Ignatieff, regardless of any ambitions he has, is only entitled to use "Honourable", as is any other Member of Parliament.
Otherwise, spot on on Ignatieff, our resident Liberal hawk. While there were a few who weren't "smart enough not to touch Iraq with a 10 foot pole", as a candidate for the Liberal leadership, he was especially prominent. This back-handed non-apology won't help his credibility.
Just a clarification: The Governor General is ceremonial head of *state*, not government, in Canada. Head of government, ceremonial or otherwise, is the Prime Minister. (The Queen, BTW, is the formal head of state.)
About Ignatieff: It's interesting to note that the motherfucker also advocated good ol' U.S. "imperialism" - at that's the word he used - to force Afghans onto the right path. And this while he was head of the Harvard Carr Center for Human Rights Policy.
About Ignatieff: It's interesting to note that the motherfucker also advocated good ol' U.S. "imperialism" - at that's the word he used - to force Afghans onto the right path. And this while he was head of the Harvard Carr Center for Human Rights Policy.
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]
Post a Comment