Apollo wrote:
That’s war: ill-conceived, hamfisted, ineptly managed. War is, in a word, “Hell.” Wars are almost never won or lost by upper management (i.e. the president), but instead by the efficiency of the armies involved. To the extent that it’s managed, you’re always dealing with scarce resources, always under attack, and have limited intelligence. To anybody who supported the war before the invasion but who opposes it now because of “incompetence,” I have no better word for you than “fool.” Perhaps “sucker” would be kinder, but I am not in a kind mood. If you support a war, then you must support that war, not support some theoretical war managed by omniscient angels. It’s sad that the therapeutic view has so overtaken even those on the right that this sort of criticism passes for intelligent.
And is seconded by Dorothy:
It’s silly to think about whether a war is being “implemented” well or not. Let’s just have the patience to see this war through and the certainty that we’re doing the right thing.
Sophistry, my dear Morgans. Sophistry.
Notice that once you accept this logic, it is impossible to come to any conclusion other than Apollo or Dorothy’s. Any criticism of the war effort is immediately dismissed as weepy, pie-in-the-sky, liberal wishfullness. It doesn’t matter that the criticism might actually be substantive, afford that mistakes happen, and acknowledge that there’s someone fighting against us. It doesn’t even matter that such criticism might hinge on the fact that the Bush Administration doesn’t always apply these truisms. Nope. “War is Hell, that’s that, quit your whining.” Save it for somebody else.
Your comments also reflect a consistent failing of President Bush’s since his reelection: the inability to fathom that someone might disagree with him, while still being on his side. In fairness, Bush has had to put-up with an almost unbelievable amount of ill-will from opponents who criticize him no matter what he does; they do not like him, his money, his manners, his privilege, his accent, or his faith, and therefore, do not like him. I understand and I sympathize. But in the past year and a half, the administration has defended itself from every criticism by attacking the motivations of the critics. Don’t think Harriet Miers is the best choice for Supreme Court Justice? You’re a sexist. Don’t think warrantless wiretapping of American citizens is a great idea? You want the terrorists to win. Think the war has been fought perfectly? You’re not serious about it. Again, save it for somebody else.
Posted by Tom in Brave New Worlds, George Bush Sucks!, Iraq