Then and Now

James Taranto of WSJ's Best of the Web has real doozer: Guess which stalwart Senators would have penned the column "Iraq: the Decade After" in the Washington Post back in 2002? Here's an excerpt for a clue (emphasis added):

Although no one doubts our forces will prevail over Saddam Hussein's, key regional leaders confirm what the Foreign Relations Committee emphasized in its Iraq hearings last summer: The most challenging phase will likely be the day after -- or, more accurately, the decade after -- Saddam Hussein.

Once he is gone, expectations are high that coalition forces will remain in large numbers to stabilize Iraq and support a civilian administration. That presence will be necessary for several years, given the vacuum there, which a divided Iraqi opposition will have trouble filling and which some new Iraqi military strongman must not fill.

Senators Joe Biden and Chuck Hagel.

The very ones who just voted to pull out our troops by next year. Taranto's only guess as to how their "decade" of overcoming the greatest challenge has come and gone so quickly is that the planet they live on has a 150-day long year.

VDH - Ripples of 1979

In his latest entry over Works and Days, Victor Davis Hanson talks about the importance of Jimmy Carter and 1979 in the unfolding contemporary events involving the 15 abducted British soldiers.

Evan Sayet

Trying to post a YouTube... And this one is good. Evan Sayet is a political satirist for Bill Mahrer of all people, but he is a 9-13 Republican. His speech is "How a Modern Liberal Thinks". It is long but good. Click on the picture:



(ht: lgf)

McClay in Rome

As his introductory post on Commentary's blog, Contentions, Wilfred McClay posts on his experience of teaching a history of American religion class to Italian students at the University of Rome. It is a delightful piece, as most of his writings always are. But its interesting to hear what fascinates his students and, more importantly, what they help him, an American, see about American religion.

The key paragraphs:

In other words, it is all entirely new to them, so that the experience of teaching them has been energizing, and has caused me to see my own subject afresh. (Thank you, Senator Fulbright.) From the inside of American culture, one is at times impressed by nothing so much as the anarchy and inanity of American religion: its thinness, its institutional chaos, its individualism, its trendiness, its willingness to pander to the consumer and to the culture. These observations remain as valid as ever. And yet my experiences here, listening to students who have grown up in a largely monochromatic religious culture, in which the choices placed before them are far more stark, cast it all in a different light.

We Americans take our freedoms too lightly in other respects, and our highly voluntaristic religious culture—and the boisterous vitality and variety of religious expression that have resulted from it—is no exception. Not all of what it produces is to my taste. But the exercise of freedom is not the same thing as good taste. “It is the duty of every man,” Madison said, “to render to the Creator such homage and such only as he believes to be acceptable to Him.” My Italian students help me to see anew the grandeur in those words.

President Bush Quotes Iraqi Bloggers

Today, Bush quoted two Iraqi bloggers (Iraq the Model) and their report that the surge is working. More at Pajamas Media.

UPDATE: Michele Malkin documents some disapproval in the MSM that Bush would use "unverified statements". Michele responds:

And never mind that Iraq the Model isn't merely an "opinion" blog reacting to news, as the snobs at the AP would have you believe. They are reporting news from the ground--which is a serious threat to MSM outlets like the AP that continue to rely on anonymous stringers relying on anonymous sources feeding them unverified statements.

She also posts Omar and Mohammed's response to the news.

Lieberman on Morality and Iraq

Kathryn Lopez at the Corner posts these comments of Lieberman made today, in response to the Senate's deliberations of the Iraq War spending bill which includes an imposed exit date from Iraq. If I find more of his statements, I'll post them or a link.

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Arguing for eliminating Iraq withdrawal language from the supplemental appropriations legislation, Senator Joe Lieberman (ID-CT) stated on the Senate floor today,

“Indeed, it is an awful irony of this debate that many of the same people who consistently and correctly call on the United States to do more to stop the bloodshed in Darfur now demand we abandon the Iraqis.”

Senator Lieberman continued, “We hear that Sunnis and Shia have been fighting for centuries, and that no matter how tragic, we cannot possibly hope to resolve this conflict. We have heard these arguments before. We heard them in the 1990s about Yugoslavia. We heard them about Rwanda. Like the euphemism of “civil war,” it is another way for us to distance ourselves, emotionally and morally, from what is actually happening—and from the people it is happening to. It allows us to think of these places as a sort of abstract tragedy, in which there are no victims, just victimizers, whom we can walk away from with impunity… The wanton slaughter of innocent people that our soldiers are trying to stop in Baghdad is not the inevitable product of ancient hatreds, but the consequence of a deliberate, calculated strategy by an identifiable group of perpetrators—first and foremost, Al Qaeda.”

Concluding, Senator Lieberman outlined both the strategic and moral consequences of a premature withdrawal from Iraq, “I ask my colleagues: consider what it will mean if Congress orders our troops to pull back from this battle, just at the moment that they are taking the initiative. Consider the consequences if we knowingly and willingly withdraw our forces and abandon one of the few states in the Middle East to have held free, competitive elections to extremism and violence...”

“We cannot redeploy from our moral responsibility to the Iraqis. It is contrary to our traditions; it is contrary to our values; and it is contrary to our interests. And yet that is precisely what this Congress will be calling for, if we order our troops to withdraw.”

UPDATE: Republican attempts to remove the deadline failed, 48-50. Two Republicans (Gordon Smith of Oregan and Chuck Hagel of Nebraska) sided with Democrats and Lieberman and Mark Pryor of Arkansas sided with Republicans. (via NY Times' The Caucus)

UPDATE 2: Senator Lieberman's website has made the speech fully available here (scroll down).