« Surging Toward Oblivion | Main | KSnuff's Spockothon »

Friday, January 12, 2007

No, God, I Was Praying For Magical Dolphins

Quasi-fisking Nooners:

The Two Vacuums
Neither Iraqis nor Democrats seem ready to do what's required of them.

That's right, it's all the Iraqis' and Democrats' fault!

What a dreadful mistake the president made when he stiff-armed the Iraq Study Group report, which had bipartisan membership, an air of mutual party investment, the imprimatur of what remains of or is understood as the American establishment, and was inherently moderate in its proposals: move diplomatically, adjust the way we pursue the mission, realize abrupt withdrawal would yield chaos. There were enough good ideas, anodyne suggestions and blurry recommendations (blurriness is not always bad in foreign affairs--confusion can buy time!) that I thought the administration would see it as a life raft. Instead they pushed it away. Like the old woman in the flood who took to the roof and implored God to send a boat to save her. A hunk of wood floated by as she prayed with fervor. A busted wooden door floated by as the waters rose and she doubled her prayers. Finally she cried "God, I asked you to save me and you didn't send a boat!" And the voice of God answered: "I sent you a hunk of wood and a door!"

We don't always recognize deliverance when it arrives. [emphasis mine]

Here's the most ironic (right, Alanis?) comment.  What do you think the November election was?  The American people said loudly that they want a way out of the quagmire, voted the Democrats into power to do that (among other things), and you still say from the outset that the Democrats aren't prepared to do what is necessary even as they oppose the escalation you yourself aren't sure of?  There's your goddamned hunk of wood and door.

Nothing in it really worked. "I had a sinking feeling," said a conservative journalist afterward. An old Republican hand: "He looked like he was over his head." Of the call for bipartisanship: "A tad late."

Yup, in over his head and a dollar late, uh...can't get fooled again.

The question that suddenly began to crop up in all the talk after the speech was: What will fill the vacuum if America simply says, "We gave it our best, but the Iraqi people didn't seem to want to cooperate in their freedom, so we will have to leave"? The talk was grim and believable. Ethnic cleansing, religious warfare, geopolitical machinations potentially harmful--almost certainly harmful, and deeply so--to America and the West.

Fucking Iraqis.  We bomb the shit out of them with our Precision Freedom Munitions, fail to rebuild their country as promised, give jobs to mercs and BushCo cronies instread of the people we liberated, and this is how they repay us?

One argument seems tired and not true. It is that if we leave Iraq, the terrorists of the world will have a safe place in which to gather, coalesce, plan and move. They already have such places, in the Mideast and outside it, and maybe here. Terrorists hide, and the world is full of hiding places.

The correctness of this part confuses and frightens me.

But there are two vacuums in the Iraq story. The first is the vacuum that would be filled in Iraq if America withdrew tomorrow. The second is the power vacuum that will be created in Washington if the administration is, indeed, collapsing. The Democrats of Capitol Hill will fill that one. And they seem--and seemed in their statements after the president's speech--wholly unprepared to fill it, wholly unserious in their thoughts and approach. They seem locked into habits that no longer pertain, and absorbed by the small picture of partisan advancement at the expense of the big picture, which is that the nation is in trouble and needs their help. They are sunk in the superficial.

Ah yes, The Unwashed, Unserious Democrats, who only passed anti-corruption legislation, stem-cell research legislation, and minimum wage legislation, as promised during the campaign.  A campaign, afterall, where Karl Rove and the other Minions of Doom told us that Iraq wasn't, after all, a very important issue.

When Nancy Pelosi showed up at the White House Wednesday to talk with the president it was obvious she'd spent a lot of time thinking about . . . what to wear.

And now we have the third vacuum: inside Peggy Noonan's head.  Who's being unserious, dearie?

Right now, in the deepest levels of the American government, intelligence and military planners should be ordered to draw up serious plans for an American withdrawal, and serious strategies for dealing with the realities withdrawal will bring. It would not be the worst thing if the Maliki government knew those plans were being drawn up. It might concentrate the mind.

Bravo.  So how about the Bush administration, who controls the intel and military prowess of our nation, get right on that?  If you're suggesting Congress should be drawing up these serious plans, you're not being serious--they must deal with the overarching strategic issue of (not) supporting escalation and withdrawing authorization for Bush to continue this disaster.

I think all the cognitive dissonance is finally completing a virtual lobotomy on the likes of Noonan, Brooks and all the other True Believers.  Really, their recent columns sound like Sybil wrote them on an old Selectric II typewriter  whilst smoking meth and washing it down with Jack Daniels on a stormy night in Ted Kaczynski's broken down cabin, always hoping against hope that the magical dolphins will swoop down the chimney to save them from an ugly reality with nasty, big pointy teeth.

ntodd

PS--Full thing below just in case it becomes less free than the Iraqis later.

The Two Vacuums
Neither Iraqis nor Democrats seem ready to do what's required of them.

Friday, January 12, 2007 12:01 a.m.

I had the odd and wholly unexpected experience of feeling supportive of a troop increase until I saw the president's speech arguing for it. What a jarring, furtive-seeming thing it was.

Surely the Iraq endeavor and those who've fought in it and put their hopes in it deserve more than collapse, withdrawal and calamity. But . . . 20,000 more troops, who'll start to arrive over the next few months, and we'll press the Iraqi government to be tougher? A young journalist who is generally supportive of the president said, "So this is it? The grand strategy is to repeat a strategy they weren't able to execute the first time they tried it?"

What a dreadful mistake the president made when he stiff-armed the Iraq Study Group report, which had bipartisan membership, an air of mutual party investment, the imprimatur of what remains of or is understood as the American establishment, and was inherently moderate in its proposals: move diplomatically, adjust the way we pursue the mission, realize abrupt withdrawal would yield chaos. There were enough good ideas, anodyne suggestions and blurry recommendations (blurriness is not always bad in foreign affairs--confusion can buy time!) that I thought the administration would see it as a life raft. Instead they pushed it away. Like the old woman in the flood who took to the roof and implored God to send a boat to save her. A hunk of wood floated by as she prayed with fervor. A busted wooden door floated by as the waters rose and she doubled her prayers. Finally she cried "God, I asked you to save me and you didn't send a boat!" And the voice of God answered: "I sent you a hunk of wood and a door!"

We don't always recognize deliverance when it arrives.

There was something unnerving about the speech, from the jumpy beginning to the stumbles to the sound glitches. A jittery affair, and some dusk hung over it. At the end I suspected the president's aides had instructed him again and again not to strut or have an edge. He perhaps understood that as: Got it--don't be me. He couldn't do wounded wisdom, but he could repress cocky cowboy. The result was that he seemed not chastened but effaced, not there. It was odd. One couldn't find the personal geography of the speech.

Nothing in it really worked. "I had a sinking feeling," said a conservative journalist afterward. An old Republican hand: "He looked like he was over his head." Of the call for bipartisanship: "A tad late."

John McCain looked pale--he looked like a ghost among the pillars--as he gave reaction on Fox from the Capitol. His voice was soft, feathery, like a speaker who'd been knocked flat on the way to the podium. "I'd much rather lose a campaign than lose a war," he said. I wondered if he was thinking, Once again this man sinks my fortunes. It's South Carolina all over again! Dianne Feinstein seemed grave on CNN. "Oh, my heart fell," she said of the president's proposal. "I was very disappointed by it." She wanted more attention to Mideast peace efforts.

Pat Buchanan on MSNBC warned of what would happen if the U.S. simply withdrew or maintained the status quo: "I think the president's gonna get this last chance, but I think it's the last one." There has been something gallant in the old battler who'd opposed the war taking no pleasure in the current crisis. Democratic foreign affairs veteran Richard Holbrooke on PBS: The speech was "an astonishing event. . . . The president is doubling down on every bad bet." Republican veteran Ken Duberstein: "I found myself watching the speech thinking, 'I want to believe.'" He did not hide his skepticism.

The question that suddenly began to crop up in all the talk after the speech was: What will fill the vacuum if America simply says, "We gave it our best, but the Iraqi people didn't seem to want to cooperate in their freedom, so we will have to leave"? The talk was grim and believable. Ethnic cleansing, religious warfare, geopolitical machinations potentially harmful--almost certainly harmful, and deeply so--to America and the West. One argument seems tired and not true. It is that if we leave Iraq, the terrorists of the world will have a safe place in which to gather, coalesce, plan and move. They already have such places, in the Mideast and outside it, and maybe here. Terrorists hide, and the world is full of hiding places.

But there are two vacuums in the Iraq story. The first is the vacuum that would be filled in Iraq if America withdrew tomorrow. The second is the power vacuum that will be created in Washington if the administration is, indeed, collapsing. The Democrats of Capitol Hill will fill that one. And they seem--and seemed in their statements after the president's speech--wholly unprepared to fill it, wholly unserious in their thoughts and approach. They seem locked into habits that no longer pertain, and absorbed by the small picture of partisan advancement at the expense of the big picture, which is that the nation is in trouble and needs their help. They are sunk in the superficial.

When Nancy Pelosi showed up at the White House Wednesday to talk with the president it was obvious she'd spent a lot of time thinking about . . . what to wear. She wrapped herself in a rich red shawl. Dick Morris said it looked like a straitjacket. I thought she looked like a particularly colorful mummy. She complained that the president had not asked for her input as he put together his plan. He should have. But what would she have brought to the table if she'd been asked to it? It is still--still!--unclear.

The other night after the speech, Rahm Emanuel, on PBS, was pressed for what he would have the president do. He blinked as if the question were a diversion. He was there to say Bush is Bad. Why bother with what might be good?

Right now, in the deepest levels of the American government, intelligence and military planners should be ordered to draw up serious plans for an American withdrawal, and serious strategies for dealing with the realities withdrawal will bring. It would not be the worst thing if the Maliki government knew those plans were being drawn up. It might concentrate the mind.

What is paramount is a hard, cold-eyed and even brutal look at America's interests. We have them. I'm not sure they've been given sufficient attention the past few years. In fact, I am sorry to say I believe they have not.

Ms. Noonan is a contributing editor of The Wall Street Journal and author of "John Paul the Great: Remembering a Spiritual Father" (Penguin, 2005), which you can order from the OpinionJournal bookstore. Her column appears Fridays on OpinionJournal.com.

Copyright © 2007 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

January 12, 2007 | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c525c53ef00d834d9a51d53ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference No, God, I Was Praying For Magical Dolphins:

Comments

The selective recollection of the Right is an impressive thing, indeed.

Eight fucking years of peace and prosperity - no, the Democrats don't know how to lead.

Posted by: watertiger | Jan 12, 2007 4:16:45 PM

When Nancy Pelosi showed up at the White House Wednesday to talk with the president it was obvious she'd spent a lot of time thinking about . . . what to wear.

Jeebus, that's rich, coming from Botox Peggy.

Posted by: Lilith | Jan 13, 2007 11:38:48 AM

Post a comment