-Caveat Lector-

------- Forwarded message follows -------


townhall.com

Liberation tastes like crow to anti-war crowd

Kathleen Parker

April 12, 2003

What was that whimpering sound?  Oh that.  It's just the "Yes, but"
crowd formerly known as the "anti-war pundits." Ignore them.

Saddam's statue had barely hit the ground in central Baghdad before
America's armchair doomsayers began harrumphing a new caveat in which to
couch this unseemly turn of events.  One might almost think they didn't
want Saddam to fall.

You couldn't help noticing the careful balance the antis tried to strike
between reluctant admission and preachy admonition.  The formula goes
something like this: "Yes, we defeated Iraq, BUT .  let's not get too
carried away, it ain't over yet."

No one exercised this template better - or more oddly - than New York
Times columnist Maureen Dowd.  Here are a couple of snippets from her
column the day Baghdad collapsed:

"Victory in Iraq will be a truly historic event, BUT (my emphasis) it
will be exceedingly weird and dangerous if this administration turns
America into Sparta."

And this: "There remains the unfinished business of Osama bin Laden.
BUT (my emphasis) the end of Operation Iraqi Freedom should not mark the
beginning of Operation Eternal War."

Hardly anything to argue with there.  But, Sparta?

Reading the myriad yes-butters, I keep free-associating to the final
scene of "Sleeping With the Enemy," after actress Julia Roberts has shot
her loathsome, raping, tyrannical husband.  The audience titters in
dread, hoping he's truly dead but suspecting a final terrifying lurch
from near-death to unleash a fatal blow.

Here's the connection: While those who supported the coalition assault
on Iraq really do hope Saddam is dead and cautiously celebrate the
demise of his regime, the anti-war gang, we suspect, is tittering
hopefully that he will yet spring again from near-death and make us
wrong after all.

Nah, no one really wants Saddam to return to power.  He was, to mimic
Dowd's vernacular, such a meanie-weanie.  Still, the Bush-bashers have
plenty of reason to wish for something less spectacular than a free and
happy Iraq festooned with flowers and sloppy with kisses for
trench-scented soldiers.  It's hard to admit you were flat wrong.

It's also hard to be humble when you're right, but guess who is both?
Guess who first cautioned against glibness, hubris, immodesty and
arrogance?  Those mean men Dowd can never bring herself to address as
adults: her Bushy, Rummy and Wolfie.  The lead players in this epochal
drama have spoken with the restraint and authority of grown-ups
undistracted by childish antics, either from the pacifist nursery or
from exuberant Iraqis tasting freedom, in some cases for the first
time.  "Let them rant" or "Let them loot," as the case may be, is an
attitude of tolerance born of higher sights.

The media are having a little more fun.  The conservative Media Research
Center, which monitors liberal slant in the media, quickly posted a
special "Gloat and Quote" edition, showcasing the predictions and news
analyses proved ridiculous by recent events.  Various bloggers and Web
sites, including National Review Online and Andrew Sullivan, did the
same, providing amusing anecdotes for dull parties.

Meanwhile, it's a good idea to stay focused, as Bush has urged without
the prompting of pundits.  There's hard work ahead, though Operation
Eternal War isn't likely part of the plan.  As in all wars, there are no
guarantees, no certainties, even though Dowd now asserts: "We were
always going to win the war with Iraq."

Who says girls can't keep secrets?  Here's what we really do know:
Coalition forces have gotten this far in "the game," as Iraq's U.N.
ambassador, Mohammed Aldouri, churlishly put it, through gritty
determination and the unflinching conviction that we were doing the
right thing.

Those who supported the war policy had no special sixth sense, no claim
to revelation or prescience.  Rather they possessed an unambiguous moral
clarity.  As journalist Christopher Hitchens put it during a television
interview - and I paraphrase wildly from memory - "There's just no way
that allowing Saddam to continue butchering innocents and potentially
threatening the rest of the world can be viewed as a morally superior
position."

No doubt the antis and naysayers, who seem to favor any old status quo
to the frightening prospect of upheaval, will lurch again from
whimpering near-death to unleash new protestations.  Little matter.
They have proven themselves irrelevant to today's reality, which
includes a freed Iraqi people for whom the operative conjunctive phrase
isn't "Yes, but" but "Yes, and."

 ------- End of forwarded message -------
--

Outgoing mail is certified virus free
Scanned by Norton AntiVirus

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>

http://archive.jab.org/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 <A HREF="http://archive.jab.org/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to