Andrew Sullivan came under a lot of fire from the left because he supported the war. Then from the right because he questioned the war. He writes today that he has read the info that President Bush has released — and that it shows the war has been “a fiasco.” Two key excerpts:
Here’s my summary: we’ve made real progress against the organized professional leadership of al Qaeda. Everywhere else, we’ve lost ground. One reason we’ve lost ground – both strategically, ideologically and politically – is because of the bungled war in Iraq, which has produced the worst of all worlds: an ineffective occupation that doesn’t bring democracy, has turned the image of the U.S. into Abu Ghraib, and has inspired many more decentralized and dangerous Jihadists across the globe. As a supporter of the war in Iraq, it’s clear that over three years later, it has spawned more terrorism, and is now causing more innocent deaths on a daily basis than Saddam’s vile regime. Whether this was inevitable or a function of the way it was conducted will be debated for decades. But this much we know: it was conducted dreadfully anyway, on the cheap, and without even minimal strategic intelligence and care. At this point in time, there’s no way to spin this except as a fiasco that has obviously made us less safe right now and in the immediate future. The only arguments the Bush administration has left is that in 2050, historians may regard it as a turning point, and that leaving now would be even worse. The first argument is pathetic; the second argument is true but only underscores their unforgivable recklessness.
At the end of his post he then writes this:
My own view is that we should either drastically up the ante in Iraq – by adding tens of thousands of new troops in a serious, concerted attempt to provide order for the first time; or we should withdraw. Anything in between continues the same worst-of-all-worlds nightmare. We knew occupying a Muslim country would be a very high-risk venture. Which is why it had to be done with overwhelming force, meticulous planning, and an equally painstaking political strategy for the aftermath. We know now that Rumsfeld and Cheney just wanted to bomb the crap out of the place to prove they had more testosterone than the Democrats and to scare a few leaders in the Middle East. But the time for their amateurism is over. Either get serious or leave, guys. And make up your mind soon.
The bottom line is that even more than during the Nixon administration (which only left the scene after tapes were produced) there is now a certain segment of American political society that has come to believe that if you question a leader or a government you are suspect OR you belong to the other side. They will adjust their viewpoints as soon as officialdom puts out its latest defense and discard arguments they used before hand. The official line becomes their official line and it’s argued vigorously…and aggressively (those who disagree are often attacked).
But now, seemingly with each passing day, the original pillars that supported the arguments for going into Iraq are dropping away. The method of dealing with these setbacks is for the White House to (a) try to move on and just not talk about what was said before (which is hard in this age of the Internet and videotape), (b) go on the offensive and paint critics as if not traitors than ignorant, naive enablers of terrorism.
This is red meat for supporters of the administration who trust whatever the government says or argues and adjust their viewpoints accordingly…and rapidly.
But it’s why the administration is losing independent voters, many traditional Goldwater/Reagan conservatives — and just plain old independent thinkers…you know: the kind of folks who check the receipts they get at the grocery store just to make sure it all adds up.
For many Americans, like Sullivan, it doesn’t add up.
And the administration saying “1 + 1 = 4” won’t cut it with them.
Joe Gandelman is a former fulltime journalist who freelanced in India, Spain, Bangladesh and Cypress writing for publications such as the Christian Science Monitor and Newsweek. He also did radio reports from Madrid for NPR’s All Things Considered. He has worked on two U.S. newspapers and quit the news biz in 1990 to go into entertainment. He also has written for The Week and several online publications, did a column for Cagle Cartoons Syndicate and has appeared on CNN.