SUBSCRIBE NOW WELCOME BACK. Do you want to continue reading where you left off? New Republic subscribers can pick up where they left off no matter which device they were previously using. SUBSCRIBE NOW

Go Home Surprise, Surprise: One Way Or The Other, The U.s. Will...

THE SPINE FEBRUARY 11, 2009

Surprise, Surprise: One Way Or The Other, The U.s. Will Still Be In Iraq When The Cows Come Home

TNR Contributing Editor Eli Lake, who writes for us from time to time, is one of those journalists for whom, no detail is without meaning. In the Washington Times this morning, Eli reports on a U.S. sale of arms to Iraq that guarantees that American troops will be in Iraq certainly until 2012 and probably until, well, the cows go home.

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Show all 31 comments

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

31 comments

Lefties in America don't care one iota about the welfare of our troops.  They are just against the idea of American intervention (evil) anywhere in the world, no matter how well it turns out or how well- intentioned.  As I predicted, even if Iraq were to turn into Japan #2 in 30 years, they'd still say it was a failed experiment.

At least now, with their man-lover in power, perhaps they can shut the hell up about Iraq (which they have) and have something constructive to say about foreign policy instead of just screaming slogans at the top of their lungs.  What are your thoughts on Afghanistan, hippie liberal douche? Do we quit when the going gets tough?

- jwl2672

February 11, 2009 at 11:56am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

No, jwl2672, lefties are the only ones who give a damn about the welfare of our troops -- that is to say, our sons and daughters.  The right doesn't give a crap about them at all, never has.  For the right, they are not people, merely symbols of American righteousness. The right is perfectly willing to throw them into the flames for no reason other than its own sanctimony and then hides the casualties when they are brought home.

You should be utterly ashamed to debase yourself by affiliating with them.  You don't redeem yourself at all with preposterous ravings about the left.

- roidubouloi

February 11, 2009 at 12:21pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

You have to be really stupid to write on freakin TNR that the left isn't hawkish enough.  Go to Yglesias' blog if you want to whine at a "hippie liberal douche"

- Simon Greenwood

February 11, 2009 at 12:39pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

It seems to me that the success of the recent elections does make the Iraqi enterprise more worthwhile.  Look, it was not the war of my choice and I wish we hadn't have done it in the first place.  But it now looks like we might be able to make the best of a bad decision.  I am a stronger supporter of aiding the emerging democracy of Iraq now than I was two weeks ago and I look forward to our participation there with a certain degree of optimism.  

- poldpf

February 11, 2009 at 1:14pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

2012? But... what happened to the 16-month withdrawal promise?

[E. Litello voice: "Never mind..."]

- teplukhin2you

February 11, 2009 at 1:29pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

So a residual force is being left behind in Iraq and this is news? Every Democrat and even Centrist Republican who has put forth a plan for withdrawing from Iraq - Kerry, Scowcroft, Biden, and yes Obama - has said they would leave behind a certain amount of troops for training Iraqi troops and hunting Al Qaeda.

- erinfrench

February 11, 2009 at 2:57pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

How does an arms sale guarantee future presence?

Also, if Obama has 8 guys in Iraq in 2012, does that mean he broke his campaign promise?

Finally, of course if Iraq = Japan in 30 years, it would be a 'failed experiment,' post hoc ergo propter hoc much? It's not an 'experiment,' it's a fucking war. Save the experiments for the science lab.

- mmathog

February 11, 2009 at 3:05pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Also, most 'leftie douches' supported the campaign in Afghanistan, what is that guy talking about?

- mmathog

February 11, 2009 at 3:06pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

roids:

80%+ of America's armed forces families vote Republican.  They are quite literally, OUR sons and daughters.  Not yours.  How many on the left not so secretly hoped for more American casualties to "prove" their point?

pdolpf:

I am heartened that some are finally beginning to turn, even if only because this guy is in office.  But that's completely absurd for those of us who have been behind it all along.  Nothing has changed in Iraq in the last 2 weeks that would encourage you to support its progress  where you did not before.  Except that the guy in charge of America has changed.  That's blind partisanship over the good of the country.

- jwl2672

February 11, 2009 at 3:07pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

My dad was traveling through Syria 30 years ago, and he stopped and took a dump in the desert.

Last summer, I went to the spot, and there was a date tree! It was a miracle!

- mmathog

February 11, 2009 at 3:07pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"That's blind partisanship over the good of the country."

Irony!

- mmathog

February 11, 2009 at 3:09pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Greenwood:

The left was hawkish until the going got tough.  Then it completely abandoned ship back in 2003/2004.

And now that Iraq is largely pacified, it is returning ever so slightly to the center.  We don't need "friends" like these.

- jwl2672

February 11, 2009 at 3:09pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

jwl and roid:  Jeez, you're both full of crap.  Everybody cares about the troops, even lefties.  And no, neither the Bushies nor this administration is just throwing their lives away.

What's the matter with you two?  Reality is a helluva lot more complex than y'all like to make out.  As BHO is finding out.

As it turns out, we've won in Iraq.  Yes, won.  Just like we did in Germany, Japan and Korea, where we still have substantial troop presence unto this very day.  No difference with this war.

- butchie b

February 11, 2009 at 3:12pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"They are quite literally, OUR sons and daughters.  Not yours."

Axl Rose's response to this is better than anything I could come up with:

www.youtube.com/watch

- mmathog

February 11, 2009 at 3:16pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"The left was hawkish until the going got tough."

The left was never 'hawkish' on Iraq, although some major members of the Democratic leadership did vote 'yes' on the AUMF. They were stupid, I notice none of them won the party's presidential nomination.

- mmathog

February 11, 2009 at 3:24pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

butchie is the best.

Will you be my vice president?

- mmathog

February 11, 2009 at 3:29pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"As it turns out, we've won in Iraq.  Yes, won."

You think so butchie? I'd like to.

I'd like to see a piece on the Sunni officer corps, are they really gonna put up with all this?

- mmathog

February 11, 2009 at 3:30pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Actually the whole idea that the success of the 2009 elections is pivotal to the Iraq enterprise is not my idea and it pre-dates the American election by quite a bit.  There is a general rule of thumb in emerging democracies that it is not the first democratic election that is crucial but the second.  The second election is important because at that point the losing side has to accept the results.  That means that the losing side both trusts the winner not to take advantage of governmental power to persecute the loser and that the losing side trusts the process enough to continue to play the elections game even though it lost.  Iraq is at a pivotal moment in its history and we can actually help.

- poldpf

February 11, 2009 at 3:54pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Yes, hog, I do.  But we'll have to stay to make sure it sticks.  Just like we have other places. The Iraqis will come to a modus vivendi, maybe with sectarian units.

VP, no.  SecState, sure.

- butchie b

February 11, 2009 at 4:39pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Roid: You have - as I have noted numerous times - a Platonic conception of left and right. Now, I think you are dead on when it comes to the Machiavellianism of the late, unlamented administration. But you know what (and I should think you would know this, too)? There are some very caring conservatives in the nation (I have met some of them) and some very callous liberals in our land (I have known some of these, too). Imagine that. The world is complex. Who knew?

- liberal reformer

February 11, 2009 at 4:53pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Germany was a young country, and we had to split it up for 45 years or so....

Japan of course was a homogenous ancient nation.

Iraq is VERY sectarian, although maybe a bit less so now (or maybe more so).

- mmathog

February 11, 2009 at 5:30pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Irony alert:

The point below is not meant to be taken literally. Please humor me by taking this point literally instead.

No, I don't think you understand. Barack Obama is different. We can trust him to keep his campaign promises. He will never let us down.

He knows that in spending one half of all the world's military expenditures, America is burdoned with a hopelessly bloated militiary earmark that exists primarily to create jobs, not defend the nation. He knows that if we excised billions and billions of pork from the Defense Department, we could spend it more constructively on vital domestic needs.

Just watch. He will take on the military industrial complex Ike warned us about once and for all.

Praise our just mighty leader!!

george

- iambiguous

February 11, 2009 at 7:47pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Butchie: what you say,  I like it.

You must be a lawyer.

Lawyers are simply the best.

Mind you, people who need lawyers (especially needed litigators) are the unluckiest people

in the world.

Better to be a needed lawyer.

Itzik

- basman

February 11, 2009 at 8:33pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Hey butchie, if you don't want VP, can I have it. It comes with free housing and is a do nothing job. Perfect for me.

I supported the war, but I sure as hell don't think any gloating about "winning" is called for. The Iraqis who survived the past 6 years, maybe for them it has been worth getting rid of Saddam. I am not sure it has been worth it for us.

- blackton

February 12, 2009 at 10:54am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

You're in Blackie.  VP it is.  

And I wasn't gloating at all, just stating what I believe to be the case on the ground.  Of course, all those who said that the invasion of Iraq was the "greatest foreign policy blunder" ever, or in the last 100 years or whatever, are in fact proven wrong.  We have lost 4,000+ in Iraq.  It is a fair argument to say,as you do, that it wasn't worth it.  But as you know, the hyperbole about the war has always grated on me.  Iraq is worse than Vietnam? Really - where we lost 58,000+ and lost?

I believe that, so far, the war has been worth it, but history will judge.

Yes, itzik, I am a lawyer.  but only after 21 years in the Army not being a lawyer.

- butchie b

February 12, 2009 at 11:40am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

iambiguous:

You're the worst of this lot.  Your cell phone came from military technology.  The internet came from military technology.  Move that money into "social" programs and what do you get? A whole lotta unemployed engineers/mathematicians and a ton of fat fuc*s on the dole.

- jwl2672

February 12, 2009 at 2:15pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

mmathog uttered:

"The left was hawkish until the going got tough."

The left was never 'hawkish' on Iraq, although some major members of the Democratic leadership did vote 'yes' on the AUMF. They were stupid, I notice none of them won the party's presidential nomination.

Gimme an effing break.  If obama actually HAD a vote in the Senate, he'd have voted the same way.  I don't know what rock you crawled under, but in case you don't know, 95% of America was in a belligerent state after 9/11 and there was no difference between al qaeda and Hussein.  In fact, there isn't.  Iran is Palestinine is hamas is hezbollah is Pakistan is Taliban is Hussein.  It's all the same cesspool of "people" whose description we dare not speak who follow the same twisted book with the same primary mandate to kill those who are not one of them.  Religion of peace? Try reading the book.

- jwl2672

February 12, 2009 at 2:20pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

mmathog:

Germany was a young country, and we had to split it up for 45 years or so....

Japan of course was a homogenous ancient nation.

Iraq is VERY sectarian, although maybe a bit less so now (or maybe more so).

We didn't split up shit on purpose.  There was no placating Russia otherwise.  Glad you brought this analogy up.  In defeating the Axis, we empowered a very powerful USSR which resulted in a 50 year cold war.  In defeating Iraq, we empowered a very powerless Iran with who knows what consequences.  This is probably the first time in the history of the world where a country so powerful (US) was held hostage by the whims of a weak one (Iran).  Were it not for the utterly spineless Europeans and liberals (whom Iran could always count on to come to their defense), Imadinnerjacket would not be running his mouth off at all for fear of death from above.  The threat of military action has to be genuine before it can be a counter to insane regimes.  American military might has held in check many a despot in the history of the world, without firing a single bullet.

- jwl2672

February 12, 2009 at 2:27pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Your cell phone came from military technology.  The internet came from military technology.  Move that money into "social" programs and what do you get? A whole lotta unemployed engineers/mathematicians and a ton of fat fuc*s on the dole."

I'm glad you support the President's stimulus package.

I agree that public money, indirectly and astonishingly inefficiently using the military as a pass-through vehicle, helped build the basic infrastructure of our major industries (except Hollywood).

Generally though, for social programs to fail as badly as the military has as an economic engine, social workers would have to pass out heroin vials in the streets.

- mmathog

February 13, 2009 at 11:40am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"If obama actually HAD a vote in the Senate, he'd have voted the same way."

Maybe so.

That misses the point however.

I'm wondering, is your IQ high enough to see that?

I leave it as an exercise to the reader.

- mmathog

February 13, 2009 at 11:41am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Support for invading Afghanistan was in the 88%-92% range (I was one of them).

The Iraq polling was funny, asked weirdly a lot, ranged from 45%-70%. A lot of people thought it was stupid and/or immoral. Obama managed to say as much in 2002, it cost Hillary Clinton the presidency.

As for the rest of your post, I'm glad you revealed yourself. It's nice to chat with a real dyed-in-the-wool racist from time to time. Yes jwl, 'they're all the same' indeed.

- mmathog

February 13, 2009 at 11:44am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

SHARE HIGHLIGHT

0 CHARACTERS SELECTED

TWEET THIS

POST TO TUMBLR

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Close