The author of George w. Bush's great Baghdad Surge, retired general Jack Keane, says the US has a moral duty to save Iraq. How and from what and for how long, Jack really can't say.
But, when all else fails, try trolling some faux morality, play the guilt card. From CanWest:
"We have obligations to the Iraqi people to not let the thugs and the killers have their way with them. We changed the Iraqi regime and we bear responsibility. It seems to me if we let our adversaries push these people off the cliff -- and tens of thousands would be killed -- it would show a lack of character."
The general, who retired in 2003 as the army's vice-chief of staff, believes the Iraq war is no longer just about winning or losing. It is now a gauge of America's moral fortitude.
What kind of country, Gen. Keane asks, invades a sovereign nation, topples its dictator, helps install a weak new government, then walks away leaving chaos in its wake?
General Jack is full of it. America does have obligations to the Iraqi people and they fell due the day they ran Hussein out of Baghdad. As occupier, America was duty bound to provide security and restore services for the Iraqi people. Four years later, electricity is sporadic and it's still hard to get a tank of gas in a country awash in oil while scores of bodies are dumped in gutters overnight. America reneged on that "obligation" four years ago, back when they could have made a difference. It is sheer sophistry to now speak reverently of America's obligations, it's grand moral duty.
And there's a neat trick. If you're losing a war, try saying it's no longer just about winning or losing. No, Jack. Of course it's about losing. If you weren't losing you wouldn't be spewing out this crap. It's all about losing.
No comments:
Post a Comment