Wrong! At least, that time-honored truism does not apply to the Council Of Alphas that sits on the New York Times' editorial board. Just One Minute shows how the Times editors were demanding that their opinions be taken as facts as they presented their terms for the surrender of George Bush and the Republican party:
To have the sober conversation about the war in Iraq that America badly needs, it is vital to acknowledge three facts:
The war has nothing to do with Sept. 11. Saddam Hussein was a sworn enemy of Washington, but there was no Iraq-Qaeda axis, no connection between Saddam Hussein and the terrorist attacks on the United States.
...The war has not made the world, or this nation, safer from terrorism. The breeding grounds for terrorists used to be Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia; now Iraq has become one. Of all the justifications for invading Iraq that the administration juggled in the beginning, the only one that has held up over time is the desire to create a democratic nation that could help stabilize the Middle East.
...If the war is going according to plan, someone needs to rethink the plan.
As Just One... points out, any of these "facts" are easily rebutable (is that a word?).
The one that irritates me most at the moment is the last one - we defeated two nations in three years while losing less soldiers than civilians killed on 9/11 and are left battling thugs whose primary desire is causing the horriffic death of innocent women and children. Lebenaon boots Syria, and all over Eastern Europe democracy emerges from the Soviet shadow. No terrorists attacks since 9/11; while under Clinton it seemed as if American interests were getting hammered on a regular basis.
Rethink the plan? America is not safer?
And the Times insist we take their facts as gospel before we can move onto a discussion of the Iraq war?
Creating your own reality to fit your pet theories - nice gig if you can get it.
Link here: http://justoneminute.typepad.com/main/2005/06/terms_of_surren.html
No comments:
Post a Comment