Posted on 02/24/2006 7:12:07 PM PST by CometBaby
"I can tell you the main reason behind all our woes — it is America." The New York Times reporter is quoting the complaint of a clothing merchant in a Sunni stronghold in Iraq. "Everything that is going on between Sunni and Shiites, the troublemaker in the middle is America."
One can't doubt that the American objective in Iraq has failed. The same edition of the paper quotes a fellow of the American Enterprise Institute. Mr. Reuel Marc Gerecht backed the American intervention. He now speaks of the bombing of the especially sacred Shiite mosque in Samara and what that has precipitated in the way of revenge. He concludes that “The bombing has completely demolished” what was being attempted — to bring Sunnis into the defense and interior ministries.
Our mission has failed because Iraqi animosities have proved uncontainable by an invading army of 130,000 Americans. The great human reserves that call for civil life haven't proved strong enough. No doubt they are latently there, but they have not been able to contend against the ice men who move about in the shadows with bombs and grenades and pistols.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
Remember when they were wagging their finger and saying “nothing will change” and that there would never be free elections in Iraq? Guess what? There were elections.
Then they said that there would be no spread of democracy in the middle east and guess what? Lebanese PM Karami resigned his pro-Syrian government and Egypt had elections with actual *opposing* candidates! This is the biggest democratization going on in the world today .. and it blows me away to think of the narrow time span in which it has all taken place.
Mr. Buckley, to me, it kinda looks like Bush's plan is working.
Oh well, if Bill says so....I don't care.
Buckley is getting old. Some weaken with age, some don't. It's sad though.
I haven't read any of Buckley's tripe for years. It's good to once again realize why every now and again. Thanks for the post.
Buckley fails to present alternative postulates, or what the alternative end game entails. He is being lazy again, and unwilling to tackle the tough choices. He just jotted this thing down in about 10 minutes as a diversion from his ennui.
Good thing Buckley isn't in charge. I don't like quitters.
Buckley has turned into something that rhymes with wussy. A big one.
This is a great disappointment.
LOL
Buckley is wrong sometimes. He is wrong about legalizing drugs. He is wrong about this. Maybe he's turning Goldwater in his old age.
I have to agree .. A great disappointment. The left is going to have a field day with this.
This is funny..cause Thomas Friedman of the NY Times...says the reason of all the new bombings is that WE are winning...and Al Quaida can't lose at home...it will destroy them...
I'd like to wait a few more months before changing horses. - tom
"It Didn't Work"
Huh. Could have fooled all our soldiers OVER THERE who say otherwise. Oh well, I guess they're just imagining the good things they're doing.
Buckley's right. The people over there don't seem to want democracy, only chaos. We can't force them to do the right thing. The ball is in their court now. What else can we do for them?
Their efforts (the enemiy's) are what aren't working BUckley
So guess what? All of those purple fingers don't lie, despite the MSM and liberal/socialists attempts to the contrary.
I can stomach anti-Pat Buchanan threads, understanding that even committed Republicans are prone to 50 years influence of communist elements within our country.
If FReepers seriously start questioning William F. Buckley with such infantile criticism as "HE'S OLD", then I will say goodbye to this liberal piece of crap website.
For crying out loud.. divide the country into three parts.. let them name their own countrys.. and let them fight it out.. Jeese.. they will end up doing that anyway.. It took Saadam wholesale murder to stop that from happening..
HE'S OLD.
"Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people." -- Hyman Rickover (Often attributed to Eleanor Roosevelt)
Huh?
---If FReepers seriously start questioning William F. Buckley with such infantile criticism as "HE'S OLD", then I will say goodbye to this liberal piece of crap website.---
Are you series?
Now do us all a favor and say "goodbye".
Buckley has had a history of being on the unpopular side of some issues with Conservatives. He has disappointed me a before. Besides, it won’t be so .. unless it actually happens in Iraq. He may have been the father of the 50s Conservative Movement, but he’s one step in his grave now. He doesn’t have it anymore. Rich Lowry seems to be a good replacement.
Translation: "Before the Americans came, we Sunnis were able to keep the 80% Shiite and Kurdish majority in a state of second class citizenship, we got preferential treatment and we could massacre the Shiites and the Kurds whenever they got too uppity. Ahh, for the good ole days before the Americans came and turned my world up side down!"
Shiites Filling a Saddam-Era Mass Grave in Iraq
Of course I could always stay for spite....
Nice slanderous tagline you have there!
I remember when Barry Goldwater started goings senile.
---He has disappointed me a before. ---
He doesn't see the right to keep and bear arms as particularily important.
No thanks. He's old.
HE'S REALLY OLD...and btw who died and made him the purveyor of all wisdom?
I'm backing the BOYS and the POTUS
He is trashing President Bush so for some that makes him next to god.
Oh, and Buckley is Old.
Sorry to bother you Admin, but isn't this a comment a little too short to qualify as a true "opus" ??
Cheers!
Buckley can be an insufferable bag of wind, when he wants to be.
I've never understood why people have thought that Buckley was such a great writer. He is a horrible orator. Thankfully, most people don't know who he is, and even fewer care.
I agree with you. Conservatives can be just as hypocritical and close-minded as liberals, and sometimes more. If Buckley wrote a column praising the President, he would be applauded, but because he disagrees, he is labeled as old and senial.
If you disagree with his points, fine, but why get personal? Incase you have not noticed, Pres. Bush is not exactly a young man either. William Buckley is still smarter than 95%-100% of everybody on this forum even at his age. Disagree with his points if you want, but leave the childish attacks out of it.
Mr. Buckley,
With all due respect, sir, you've gotten lazy. You have resorted to reading the newspaper to get your news. It is sad that you seem to have missed all of the good news from Iraq. It's sad that you don't realize that outside of Baghdad and the 3 provinces under curfew, life has vastly improved for the Iraqi people. It's sad that you've lost your will to foght for what's right. It's just sad.
Sincerely Disappointed,
REDWOOD 99
Senior conservatives fought the good fight for decades, before it was popular, before communication ever favored free ideas.
Bunch of spoiled unruly freshmen showed up in 2001, melded 9-11 into a weapon for their leftist views, and now proceed to insult and dismiss the work of champions like Buckley and others.
It's cool to wear a varsity jacket -- but Neocons represent the airheaded girlfriends who stole them off the backs conservative athletes who earned them. (And then they go and cheat on them, naturally...)
Buckley has outlived his usefulness around here anyway. The only time he ever gets trotted out in support of an issue is over making drugs legal and they can't use President Reagan.
He may have 'disappointed' you before but he is usually right. In this case, in the long run, he will be right again. Rich Lowry is nothing more than a partisan hack. I'll take the esteemed Mr. Buckley's views over Lowry's any day of the week
Couple weeks ago I engaged with a poster I didn't know-- turned out she was an 85 year old woman!
Perfectly wise and interesting in her comments. Moreso than the obvious opposition we are sensing here tonight.
Their turnout for the 2 elections was very high, even by American standards, so it's probably not accurate to say they don't want democracy.
One of these postulates, from the beginning, was that the Iraqi people, whatever their tribal differences, would suspend internal divisions in order to get on with life in a political structure that guaranteed them religious freedom.Here are the central points of the article. I cannot argue with any of it.The accompanying postulate was that the invading American army would succeed in training Iraqi soldiers and policymkers to cope with insurgents bent on violence.
This last did not happen.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.