Silence Means ...

My friend Steve wanted to know why there was nothing on my blog about the hugely sucessful elections in Iraq yesterday.  Why was I so silent?

John Podhoretz says, "Wow, suddenly it's so quiet in here you can hear crickets chirping"  in his Vindicated column in the NY Post.

Jeff Jarvis calls the liberals who questioned the war in Iraq eeyeores and its no wonder that those who argued the wisdom of the war in Iraq have gone under cover from the squeals of glee from the right.

I emailed Steve my thoughts and he had the predictable response - incredulance followed by an attempt to convert me to the correct view.

When I saw the pictures of Iraqis voting on the front of the NY Times today along with the news that over 60% turned out to vote, I smiled. I did not think it was actually bad news. People rising up and taking their country's future into their own hands is never bad news. I thought about taking our kids to vote last fall and I told my them that this was an incredible moment for Iraq and the future of democracy.

It wasn't until later when I started to read the taunting of Michael Moore, John Kerry, and the rest of the liberals, that my good feelings turned bad.

This election is the first time that the Iraqi people have shown the rest of the world that they actually do want democracy and freedom. I wonder what took them so long. I wonder why they have sat back and watched the insurgency take its toll on their country.

I wonder if freedom for the Iraqis is worth 1400 lives, countless limbs, billions of our tax dollars, and a shattered reputation throughout the world.

I said all of this to Steve, who replied that, "it was specious to speculate what one life, 100 lives, or 1400 lives was worth", and that "The attempt to create an alternative to radical Islam - even at the expense of significant blood and treasure - is not only worth it, but is necessary and unavoidable."  He went on to say that "it's either thousands of lives now or hundreds of thousands, or even millions, of our kids lives later".

Clearly that is the view of the Bush administration and many of the people in this country, probably the majority given the election results last fall. I respect that and my respect for that is the main cause of my silence until prodded by Steve, Podhoretz, and Jeff.

But it isn't my view. And one of the reasons I love blogging is that we can all share our views and debate them out in the open.

My view is that we have bigger battles to fight than the one in Iraq.

My view is Iraq's next door neighbor Iran, the country that was strengthened by the Shiite win in the Iraqi election, is more likely to build something that could do the damage that Steve fears than the Iraqis.

My view is the North Koreans are more dangerous than both.

And yet we haven't gone in to free either of those countries.

Does our "success" in Iraq mean we must now go do the same in those countries?

Where does this policy of pre-emption stop?

If that makes me an eeyore, so be it.  I am thrilled for the Iraqis. I hope they thank the men and women who lost their lives so they could vote.

And I hope we stop the pre-emptive experiment where it started in Iraq and wait to see how it turns out over the long haul before deciding to try it elsewhere.

Comments

[anonymous]

Good call. Even if this operation was sucessful, it was still a gamble of gigantic porportions (as in we shouldn't try it again). I don't think it's necessarily a good thing to play Monte Carlo at the national level.

[Kadoom]

Don't you think that there is a direct relationship between seeing Iraquis voting and the possibility that others, in the region and elsewhere, will see that maybe, just maybe, they will have their chance as well?

And isn't there the possibility then that this small ray of hope may, just may, lead to more pressure for choice?

These maybes and possibilities may not be enough to justify the lives and the billions, but it certainly is another nail in the coffin of those that say that the muslims and the asians and the africans are not yet ready for democracy.

[Englishman]

It's clear that the US administration desperately needs to call success in Iraq, and its great that so many people turned out to vote, but its not clear that this constitutes sucess or vindication for US policy. That might come, but it certainly hasn't arrived until the day when Iraq has a democratically elected stable government that doesn't require 150,000 US troops to protect it.

There is plenty of evidence that what the Iraqi people want is the US [and British] troops out now so they can decide their own future.

[Don]

Very good post. I'm a Bushie, I'll say that up front. I'll also say that Iran scares the hell out of me, far more than Iraq ever did. What to do with them and the North Koreans is a question for folks smarter than me. I don't think the country will stand for another pre-emptive war. So, what to do? Who knows.

[Jason Chervokas]

The problem with all the glee over the Iraq vote is three-fold:

First, everything that's going on in Iraq now is sheer damage control. We went to war on the premise that US security was at risk because of Iraq's WMDs. There were no WMDs. There was no threat to US security. There was no compelling state's interest in invading and occupying the country. I won't go into the question of did we jump or were we pushed into war for unstated reasons by the Bushies other than to note that the administration did not inform Congress prior to the vote on use of force, that only on junior analyst thought the aluminum tubes could have a nuclear use while most of the CIA and AEC analysts thought not. Now that we're stuck there we have no moral or strategic choice but to leave behind a stable, US-friendly state.

Second, a vote held under gunpoint after US forces sealed the airports and borders and in which few Sunnis participated is the bare minimum of a start down the road. It's a far, far cry from a stable, self-governing, modern, non-tribal nation state that can defend itself. We're still years away from that, if it is even ever possible. My guess is that the Constitutional Convention will result in the Kurds declaring independence and all kinds of diplomatic problems w/ Turkey stemming from that for US and the NATO allies.

Third, the US is building the biggest embassy complex in the world in Iraq w/ a substantial military base attached to it as well as building other permanent military installations around the country. The perpetual rap about democracy and freedom is bullshit. What the operations in Iraq are about is sheer strategy--installation of a US friendly government in the heart of Arabia where a permanenet US military prescence that is increasingly unwelcome and hamstrung operationally in Saudi Arabia can be stationed and can act unhindered diplomatically.

[Bo Struble]

But Fred, and others of that viewpoint, can you honestly answer one fundamental question? Bottom line, and after seeing the pictures we saw over the weekend, do you think it would be better to still have Saddam in power? For the US? For the world? For the Iraquis? Because that is what it boils down to, without direct US action, Saddam and his sons and henchman are still terrorizing their people and menacing the world. In my mind, it is an absolute no brainer, it was all worth it, we basically had no choice.

[Tony Alva]

"Now that we're stuck there we have no moral or strategic choice but to leave behind a stable, US-friendly state"

...and what's wrong with that?

Completely disagree with Ole Trickster's prediction of a Kurdish split. He needs to read Iraqi bloggers more frequently. They predicted the outcome on the nail and I'm more inclined to get the real pulse of what the feeling is over there from them, Iraqi’s themselves vs. US press and liberal bloggers.

I Think Fred misinterpreted Jarvis's characterization of Eeyore's. Yes, there are partisan assholes doing end zone dances out there inciting equally asinine responses from the left, but I think the real Eeyores are the ones who can't for one minute take stock in what occurred in Iraqi on Sunday and find something positive in it. Who just can't manage to bring themselves to admit that, while this is only the beginning, it was truly a watershed moment. That will seek out reasons to shit on any positive progress that results from the elections.

What party spoilers both the end zone dancers and the Eeyores are. Watching celebrating Iraqi's and making comments like, "…a vote held under gunpoint after US forces sealed the airports and borders and in which few Sunnis participated is the bare minimum of a start down the road. It's a far, far cry from a stable, self-governing, modern, non-tribal nation state that can defend itself..." is tantamount to saying to a three year old at her birthday party “Yeah, it’s a day to celebrate, but it’s only just a meaningless ritual and don’t forget, you’re one day closer to dying”. That’s an Eeyore.

Inspiration comes in many forms and can be a force multiplier. Even when small, success should be celebrated in order to inspire the meek and to change prevailing opinion. This is clearly one of those moments. If the 60% that showed up to vote inspires the other 40% to do so next time it’s a GOOD thing. If it proves to be a motivating factor in instilling the confidence needed to take action when witnessing insurgent activity in those who are turning a cowardly eye on it currently, then recognition of this positive effect should be acknowledged.

My prediction is that Iraqi’s will slowly begin to realize exactly how self-serving the terrorists are. They are killing Iraqis indiscriminately, not strategically, and this exposes their true motivations, which are NOT to liberate them from American imperialism. The terrorists don’t give a crap about Iraqis. It becomes clearer and clearer with each passing day.

A stable and free Iraqi is a good thing for Iraqi’s and Americans alike. This is a fact whether you voted for Bush or not. Congratulations to the Iraqi people.

Aasha Al-Iraq….Aasha Al-Iraq….Aasha Al-Iraq

[jackson]

"The moment we want to believe something, we suddenly see all the arguments for it, and become blind to the arguments against it."
George Bernard Shaw

[steve]

jackson, what are you saying? that the left is deluded? or is it the right? or both? or just you? or...?

sigh. there's nothing like a heavy sounding quote from a long dead intellectual (who openly strongly admired Fascism and Stalin, by the way) cited without any context, to create the illusion of profundity, while in fact signifying nothing. a ridiculous crutch so often used in the mainstream media by pundits and columnists that we'veall stopped
seeing it. but then again:

"It is dangerous to be sincere unless you are also stupid."
George Bernard Shaw (1856-1950)

[Jeremy Punnett]

This wasn't the first time the Iraqi people have shown that they want democracy. How patronising is that? Its just the first chance they have had in a while to vote, and they got this despite, not because of, Bush. I agree with a lot of your other comments but to say its the first time the Iraqi people want democracy is patently false.

They aren't even voting for a government, they are voting for a group to write a constitution, something without precedent as far as I can figure. And with their debt being wiped only if the IMF manage the economy they aren't going to stay quiet for long.

The elections were a sham. A device to buy time while Bush works out what hisnext move is and the construction of the 14 permanent bases continues. Democracy my ass. They will end up with a theocracy like the US.

[Tom Watson]

Sadly, Mr. Citizens Media himself didn't have either the judgement or the cajones to link to "eeyores" who reacted against his posts...Jeff is becoming a product of his own press. Couple of links he refused to link to (I sent them his way and he's usually very responsive):

http://jameswolcott.com/archives/2005/01/radioactive_aft_1.php
http://tomwatson.typepad.com/tom_watson/2005/01/the_sky_is_fall.html
http://lancemannion.typepad.com/lance_mannion/2005/01/mission_accompl.html

Chervokas said it well.

[Tom (American Voter)]

My view is the North Koreans are more dangerous than both.

And yet we haven't gone in to free either of those countries.

Every modern day military strategy I know of recommends attacking the weak links first. Iraq was obviously the weakest of the “axis of evil” and as others have mentioned, the fall of Saddam and free elections in Iraq can only improve the chances that the Iranians will revolt without direct intervention by the US.

North Korea is a much harder nut to crack but it seems possible they will implode all by themselves so why risk a conflict?

[Helmar]

"I wonder if freedom for the Iraqis is worth 1400 lives, countless limbs, billions of our tax dollars, and a shattered reputation throughout the world."

I hope you don't imply that the thousands _INNOCENT_ Iraqis (even the so-called "insurgents" are innocent, because they didn't attack the USA) are worthless.

"When I saw the pictures of Iraqis voting on the front of the NY Times today.."

Well, that's the problem, because most of your fellow citizen only react to what they see on TV, and it's patently obvious that what TV shows is anything but the truth. But they don't get it, because for them there is little if anything else, and consequently they don't even question what they're presented with... on TV or in 'the NY Times today'. If they did, 90% of the army would have refused going to Iraq, but now they are dying for the Government and its master's greed.

BTW, fascinating book: "The Syndicate" by Nicholas Hagger. (ISBN: 1903816858 ) The shape of things to come. Now you can't say you didn't know...

[Helmar]

Tony Alva: "They [the so-called terrorists] are killing Iraqis indiscriminately, not strategically".

What's the difference, Tony? Remember that the US army are the terrorists and insurgents, because it was THEY who invaded Iraq, not those now fighting them.

Jeremy Punnett: "Democracy my ass."

Amen! It's just that the moment you say that, your opponents shower you with "Leftist!" or "Commie!" insults due to their inability to see anything between Communism and Democracy. But if you then do some research and realise that communism is actually a product of the capitalists (Jakob Schiff and his cronies), then it's easy to understand that this polarity is only meant to make one option look so bad (as it happened with "communism") that everybody -and without question- adopts the other one. So dare you question the holy democracy, which - if you remember the 2000 US elections - isn't worth the paper it's written on! It's far more insidious, though, than some obvious electoral fraud and bribing of judges, and you can read all about the gory details in Nicholas Hagger's "The Syndicate".

Another interesting book: "Democracy: The God That Failed". (ISBN: 0765808684)

[Tony Alva]

This from a guy who pines for the days of stability that apartheid provided in S. Africa. Geezzz...

[jackson]

Steve,
The question is can you argue the rhetoric? I think not. The quote, by it's very nature, reflects both sides of the argument. A closed mind is a dangerous thing. As for G.B.S. being dead, well you can't fault him there. I'd like to know where you came across his facist and Stalinist leanings, the two are notoriously incongruous.

[Raymond]

Cowards

Freedom has always come at the expense of blood

cowardly left that mass murdered 174 Million people over 80+ years, pretending to give us advice.

" A man who has nothing which he is willing to fight for, nothing which he cares about more than he does about his personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. " -- John Stuart Mill, 1862

The Marxo-defeat-o-crats in the west carp about what it takes to gain freedom, taking atvantage of the freedoms they have, won by the blood of others, sneering at the very thing that gained it for them.

They are the lowest of the low.

[steve]

jackson,

gb shaw's admirations for fascism and stalin are well known. shaw's writings were clear and not subtle. even a simple goodgle search turns up any number of resources.

not that "The World And I" is an authoritative source, or even a good one, but it was an easy one to find and sums it up nicely:

"As the years passed, however, [Shaw] grew impatient that the world was not turning socialist fast enough to suit him. Shaw came to see value in brutality. As the old saying goes, you can't make an omelette without breaking eggs, and Shaw wanted his omelette. He found a new hero in Oswald Mosley, the founder of the British Union of Fascists. Shaw would describe Mosley admiringly, as "the only striking personality in British politics." He also admired the Italian fascist Mussolini and, even more, the communist Stalin. Shaw visited Stalin in Moscow, in 1931, and found nothing disconcerting about Stalin's mass murders: "Our question is not to kill or not to kill, but to select the right people to kill ... [T]he essential difference between the Russian liquidator with his pistol (or whatever his humane killer may be) and the British hangman is that they do not operate on the same sort of person." The playwright famous for inventing Shavian irony would, without irony, recommend Joseph Stalin for the Nobel Peace Prize."

http://www.worldandi.com/newhome/public/2003/may/bkpub.asp

[steve]

Jackson

Here's The New Criterion also:

"Shaw’s behavior during and after his Russian trip borders on the insane. His immutable philosophy of optimism, confronted with the realities of Soviet policy, retreated into fantasy: “his imagination bleached away all signs of pain and horror,” says Holroyd. Shaw in Moscow presents a terrifying parody of Shavian glee. “Our question is not to kill or not to kill, but to select the right people to kill … the essential difference between the Russian liquidator with his pistol (or whatever his humane killer may be) and the British hangman is that they do not operate on the same sort of person.” A far cry indeed from the unconditional pacifist of the First World War. The spectacle of Shaw’s grim gaiety in the presence of oppression and murder is fearful, and shows the lengths to which he would go to preserve his faith in optimism and human perfectibility. Shaw professed, bizarrely, to have found religion in Moscow. “Jesus Christ has come down to earth. He is no longer an idol. People are gaining some sort of idea of what would happen if He lived now.”

http://www.newcriterion.com/archive/12/sep93/shaw.htm

[David Locke]

Democracy will not create an alternative to radical fundamentalist Islam. Democracy is about governance rather than social structure. It was the errosion of social structure caused by the petro dollar and wealth that has caused the unemployment that drives people to radical fundamentalist Islam.

It's all good and fine that they voted and that they have a goverment, but how long will we have to stay and prop it up? How long will the guerilla war go on? How repressive will the U.S. back goverment have to be? How long will we be training their Army. Sounds like Vietnam all over again, still. You don't win guerilla wars will repressive poltical actions or troops. So here we go again. And, where in any of this is the fight against terrorism? Lost is my guess.

The financial burden and the draft will be here soon enough. It would have been hard to imagine that the death of only 3000 Americans would cause our country to give up its identity. Amazing the power of what twelve people, the power of fear, and the demonstrated lack of leadership. Just amazing. All the while supporters sing praise, and the fear lives on.

[spamus]

cytherea schoolgirl Ť cytherea scream Ť cytherea scuirt 101 Ť cytherea scuirt blog Ť cytherea scuirt catalog Ť cytherea scuirt clip Ť cytherea scuirt clips Ť cytherea scuirt contest Ť cytherea scuirt creampie Ť cytherea scuirt download Ť cytherea scuirt downloads Ť cytherea scuirt downloads clips Ť cytherea scuirt fake Ť cytherea scuirt free Ť cytherea scuirt free movie Ť cytherea scuirt free movies Ť cytherea scuirt gallery Ť cytherea scuirt glass Ť cytherea scuirt media player Ť cytherea scuirt mirror Ť cytherea scuirt movie Ť cytherea scuirt movie wmv Ť cytherea scuirt movies Ť cytherea scuirt movies in Ť cytherea scuirt mpeg Ť cytherea scuirt mpeg download Ť cytherea scuirt mpeg sample Ť cytherea scuirt mpegs Ť cytherea scuirt mpg Ť cytherea scuirt onlygonzo

[s.reed]

How dare you blindly believe what they tell you. Think for yourself.
I find the irony of "silence means" as a title disgusting. "Silence means security" was the WWII propaganda. Silence. You blindly follow without asking 60% really? and you are so mis informed even the NY times admitted to the 30,000 dead non-military citizens of Iraq dead due to the war. We complain of our 2,00 dead soldiers. Those soldiers chose to sign away they're lives to the government. The 30,000 dead innocent had no choice. You really think that they want democracy? You really think insurgents as you call them which in military definitions means an Iraqi male age 18-50 is the cause of this war continuing. If foriegn invader waged war in the U.S and the continued war had killed 30,000 citizens dn't you think that as a people we would fight to get them out? Thats whats happening and whats worse is we muse about this on web blogs in the wealth and comfort of a world at war without civilian casualties. US children aren't dying in this war. MEN enlisted men die but not children. Iraqi children by the thousands die. 50 citizens a day and you muse to think hw we should support democracy and back Bush. Wake up take the ipod off your ears and look at whats happening. Is 50 citizens a day dead worth whatever it is our government is trying to gain? What do we gain by being there? The Iraqi people want us gone. We continue to "conduct surveilence" of residential Iraqui streets. The bombing then blows up the houses when tanks are attacked. Because the streets are that narrow. The people have pleaded for military to stay away from their homes and instead they have increased the "security sweeps" we are the cause of their deaths. We have no place in Iraq we are saving no one. We have no mission wee are war mongers lead by a WAR CRIMINAL WHO IN DEFIANCE OF THE UN INVADED IRAQ. We should be calling for the arrest and trial of George Bush. Not saying oh yes they want us to liberate them at the cost of 30,000 lives. 50 per day! YES they want the US promise of Democracy. They want us gone and if by holding an election they can possibly remove the US from their land they'll take it. They will elect dictators and US puppets if it means stopping the bombing that has rained down on them for 9 years. Because despite the signing of the cease fire that supposedly ended the Gulf War bombing continued and has since the first day we invaided Iraq in the name of Kuwait. Silence does not mean security, Ignorance is not bliss. You keep watching intently on Iraq until you recognize too late the magicians trick and find that the other hand has swiped away your constitutional freedoms in the name of security. Security from the phantom threat of terrorism. Do you remember when news reports of terrorist bombings in France and Japan never ended with borders closing and citizens warned by color codes to try to keep them in fear like an Orsen Wells War of the Worlds Halloween Prank? I do. Don't believe that myth of needing to fear terrorists all around. Don't believe that what our government promises is freedom to Iraq or its own citizens. Silence is not Security.

[Raj]

We can help you & your blog readers by providing a 'solution for bounced email'.

Please feel free to put our link on your website and write a blog:
Link description: Solution for bounced email
Link: http://www.switchemail.com

THANKS for your help!

Sincerely,
Raj Vats