November 18, 2005

ONLY DEMOCRATS WOULD CUT AND RUN FROM A VICTORY:

Index ranks Middle East freedom (BBC, 11/18/05)

There is a wide range of democratisation across the Middle East, a survey by a leading research and advisory firm has found.

The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) ranked 20 countries on 15 indicators of political and civil liberty.

The Index of Political Freedom lists Israel, Lebanon, Morocco, Iraq and the Palestinian Territories as the most democratic parts of the region.

Libya received the lowest rating, below Syria and Saudi Arabia.


Hard to imagine how things could be going any better in the region. At a similar point after Pearl Harbor the peopple of Eastern Europe still had fifty years of totalitarian oppression ahead of them.

Posted by Orrin Judd at November 18, 2005 10:18 PM
Comments

One thing to remember is that the majority of people now questioning it supported it and many voted for Bush. To try and frame their concerns in partisan rhetoric is wrong, not just a political mistake, but a lie.

Even the most radical proposal, that of "cut and run" is not just one of flaky lefists. General Odom was head of NSA under Reagon and is neither ignorant or unpatriotic. I for one want his arguments considered.

http://www.niemanwatchdog.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=ask_this.view&askthisid=129

I myself have doubts. For example I think the existing civil war can deepen. Dozens of neighborhoods and villages around Baghdad are "purifying" with Shiite fleeing Sunni areas and vice versa. This is often a setting for genocidal civil war. So I think we may need to have some force there.

But I want this issue faced and discussed, just as we need to deal with the slowing economy there, the health crisis, the crime and corruption.

http://amconmag.com/2005/2005_10_24/cover.html

In addition to General Odom's arguments we must also face that of many other critics including a large number with military and defence experience. They feel that the war on Iraq has weakened our capacity to fight other terror.

Obviously resources which could be used elsewhere are focused on Iraq. These include intelligence analysts, translators, special operations units and simple attention. Our strained land forces are almost forced to reduce their numbers in Afghansiant.

There are also consequences with our allies. They have been crucial in the capture of thousands of suspected terrorists and supporters. Alienation can reduce this cooperation. This is especially true among Arab nations were we are increasingly seen as supporting Shiite oppression of Sunni.

The later brings up another big issue. Iran is a member of the axis of evil and seems intent on increaing it's power and building nuclear weapons. We are limited in how we act there because of our vulnerabilities in Iraq.

Iranian backed militias control much of the south through which our communications lines run. These same militias are intertwined into the government and the security services. They and the militias of anti American (but not Iranian ally) Sadr control many areas outside of the south. If they were to start acting against us we could face serious losses and problems.

I do not support withdrawal from Iraq, but I do understand why many informed and patriotic people do. I think we have serious problems there and the best way to deal with them is to bring these issues forth and analyze them, not simply divide into simplistic partisan positions.

I am willing to accept some rightists critiques of some leftsist, but I see the right engaging in the same lack of for the real problems and solutions over there. The are caught in silly political games.

Posted by: diane at November 21, 2005 1:02 PM
« WHEN ZEUS-WORSHIPPERS ATTACK (via Brett Wallach): | Main | WAS THAT REALLY HIS BEST SHOT? (via Luciferous): »