I can find almost nothing to agree with in that opinion piece, particularly this paragraph:
For a start, many tens of thousands of ordinary Iraqis would still be alive, as would several thousand troops from the coalition countries. The terrorists born from the resulting anger and grief would not be about their deadly work. Indeed, without the oxygen of Iraq feeding their bitter fires and with the US and more western allies having focused on Afghanistan and the border regions with Pakistan, al-Qaida may be clinging to diminishing relevance in those barren hills. Muslims worldwide would not have been provoked to take a stand against all things western. America would not have sacrificed its principles relating to torture and the Geneva convention, and may not have lost its diplomatic credibility.
The sentence "Muslims worldwide would not have been provoked to take a stand against all things western" packs so many fallacies into one short statement that I can hardly even begin to extract them all.
I also love his touching faith that America would otherwise never have "sacrificed its principles relating to torture". Where exactly does he think the prisoners in Gitmo came from?
no subject
Date: 2013-03-20 04:29 pm (UTC)I also love his touching faith that America would otherwise never have "sacrificed its principles relating to torture". Where exactly does he think the prisoners in Gitmo came from?