Dada is the sun, Dada is the egg. Dada is the Police of the Police.



(I like that better than "Iraqization." Same bullshit, but easier to pronounce.)

It's kind of sad that there's still really no serious discussion going on in the media, Blogland included, about what is really going on in Iraq. Simply put, too few have put much effort (myself included) into investigating - and explaining, really - the situation in Iraq: what the Bush administration's purposes are (permanent bases? oil?), what the wishes of the Iraqi people are (Glenn Reynolds can sit in front of his computer and declare that the Iraqis are better off with the occupation, but his opinion is quite irrelevant), how much of Iraq the US actually controls (not as much as most people probably think), etc.

Josh Buermann gets it:
Do those promulgating "Iraqization" and a "timetable" based upon the ability of the US-backed government to defend itself remember that we're refusing to equip the Iraqi government with the tools required for such an effort? ... Why have we been purposefully keeping the new Iraqi government weak? We could wildly speculate but we don't really know why we're there in the first place.

If, as the Loyal Opposition now believes, the Administration lied about its casus belli then what do they think the actual motive was? That our objective has been for "free and fair elections [to] be conducted without foreign influence"? I bet! Lacking any honest assessment, let alone national discussion, of why we are in Iraq it seems shortsighted to me that anybody suggest that we continue to give the administration rope enough to continue prosecuting its dubious objectives. If you somehow got so far as to pass such legislation, for instance, "that the US should only make this airstrike capability available for defensive operations" then they will simply call all their operations "defensive responses".

If we're to pretend that the administration somehow sees as its first priority the prevention or mitigation of a civil war then the way out looks pretty clear, and they haven't taken it.
These are a great couple of paragraphs, and I hope Josh will forgive me for quoting from them at such length. The entire 'debate' over Iraq in the mainstream corporate media, and on the big-name liberal blogs like Daily Kos, is basically drenched in bullshit. Democrats like Markos might be on the right side of the Iraq debate in the sense that they oppose the war (though has Kos called for immediate withdrawal?), but the fact that they don't really understand just what is going on in Iraq undercuts a lot of their effectiveness as critics of the administration.

The Iraq debacle is not a result of an 'idealistic' neoconservative vision for freedom in the Middle East that was, while admirable, unrealistic. Nothing could be further from the truth. It was an unprovoked invasion - a crime - undertaken for the Bush administration's selfish reasons without regard for the welfare or wishes of the people of Iraq or the United States. If you didn't think that before the war, you can't deny it now, after seeing the way the administration executed the occupation - not only incompetently, but viciously and brutally.

Anything short of a call for immediate withdrawal implies some level of trust in the Bush administration's will and ability to help the Iraqi people. And anyone with even a modicum of rationality knows that such an idea is laughable at best.

Blogarama - The Blog Directory Sanity is not statistical.