Digging Deeper Into My Last Post
I had a feeling that the tone and direction of my last post would be a bit dissonant, but I hardly expected to be called a "blithering idiot" and "brain dead" by a leading blogger (who will go unnamed).
As anyone who reads here knows, I have been a fierce opponent of the war, in the sense of how we justified it, and the crooked politics behind it, but my reaction to today's bombing of the Red Cross is not partisan, and is based upon reality, and where we stand today on the ground.
The sheer audacity and utter criminality of bombing the Red Cross is beyond defense, and goes without saying. For whatever cause or resistance. Such an act should not ba a rallying cry for the Islamic world, but a moment of reflection as they start Ramadan. Is that what they want to stand behind? The murder of those who are only in Iraq to help innocents who are suffering in a war zone? Targeting a clear and principled neutral party?
In my mind, in the face of these acts, and their timing, there should be no retreat, and no surrender. This should not be construed as a defense of Bush's policies, just a show of support for decency. I certainly don't hear many bloggers saying we should turn tail and go home. Especially in the face of these bombings. If not, what's the alternative to what I'm saying?
Any party or individual who does not see the evil in such a deed, in the bombing of the Red Cross, who fails to denounce it, and who actively opposes us, should meet their doom. I mean that. Whole-heartedly. For example, if Iran sees the wrong in bombing the Red Cross, they should say so. If they don't, they are suspect, and not worthy of relations with the free world and liberal civilization.
I can't exaggerate the extent of my offense and shock at the targeting of the Red Cross. In no way, shape, or form should such an act be justified in any way, including any signal or sign of retreat or weakness in response. Anything short of outright condemnation, at least in my mind, is irresponsibility and naivete, if not cowardice or malevolence.
And I repeat, this does not mean that I have forgotten the ills and misadventures of the Bush Administration. They are still clearly in view. Nor have I forgotten the blatant manipulation and corrupt justifications we used to initiate the war. Still, that is not salient for an attack on the Red Cross.
It's one thing to ridicule Bush for constantly overplaying how we are "winning" and "succeeding", and quite another to hint or assert that we are "losing" or "failing". We aren't. The damage is already done, we are on the ground in Iraq, degenerate forces including terrorists are on the scene, and the Iraqi people and prospect hang in the balance. We will succeed, one way or the other. We must.
And for the good of the world, we are. Really. We will not, and are not, being defeated. Would anyone actually advocate leaving the peoples of Iraq to these thugs? If so, please explain that foreign and security policy. I'd love to hear the whole vision and strategy.