(2005-03-09) Taibbi Vs Andersen Iraq

Kurt Andersen challenged those of us not pacified by the Iraqi elections (War On Iraq). Each of us has a Hobbesian choice concerning Iraq; either we hope for the vindication of Bush's risky, very possibly reckless policy, or we are in a de facto alliance with the killers of American soldiers and Iraqi civilians... At a certain point during the Vietnam War, a majority of Americans - those of us who were in favor of unilateral U.S. withdrawal - were in a de facto alliance with the North Vietnamese, the Vietcong, and the Soviets. Unpleasant but true.

• uh, did he really mean Hobsons Choice? (Wiki Wiki Web:Hobsons Choice) No, he was just trying to be witty.

Matt Taibbi rips him one. There is a vast array of other outcomes and developments to root for. We could root for Bush to admit he fucked up and appeal to the world for help in stabilizing Iraq. We could root for a similar admission and a similar appeal to the UN, only coupled with an immediate American withdrawal. We could root for America to come out firmly against the Israeli occupation of Palestine, which would change the equation in Iraq. We could root for such things as the turning over of Iraqi oil contracts to the United Nations and an end to war profiteering - which, again, would change the equation in the war... Along with millions of other people, I opposed the war before it began, and we opposed it not because we thought we might lose or fail in Iraq, but because invading Iraq was wrong. It was wrong because they were lying about why we were invading; it was wrong because the whole notion of preemptive invasion is immoral and dangerous; it was wrong for a dozen other plainly irrefutable reasons that will not change if Iraq is magically transformed into Switzerland by next year.