On occasion, I will succumb to a rather dangerous logical trap: to conflate an argument with the person who is making it — or, more often, opposing it. If I don’t grasp an issue, I’ll sometimes look at who is on which side, and see which I tend to find more repugnant. “It has the right people pissed off” has been a factor more than once in my decision-making.
But most of the time, I really try to look beyond the arguers and arguments over an issue, and decide it strictly on its own merits. I believe I do that with the war in Iraq, and my continuing belief that it was the right and necessary decision.
I don’t give a faded fart about the “official” arguments and statements. To me, they are all extraneous to the core issue: was it the right decision? Does it remain the right decision?
I think it was, and I think it is.
John Weidner, apparently, feels much as I do, because he’s assembled a rather remarkable list of reasons why he believes as he does. He hits pretty much all the same points I have made, and several I haven’t, and puts them together in a single compact, concise, clear package. 13 items, each captured in a single paragraph.
Go. Read. Comment there, or here, or both. But John presents one hell of a case.
Diane:
Thanks for the explanation. I understand your view now and I agree with much of it.
But we are stuck with a President who simply cannot think “outside the box” when it comes to geopolitical strategy. Requiring the Chinese to hold our hands while we talk to North Korea make us look like we haven’t got the guts to sit down with them one-on-one.
————————————————
Bilateral talk has been proven a failure. THe people who know how to deal with North Korea short of war has to go through the Chinese. And our card with the Chinese is the Japanese nuclear rearmament.
WE are forcing the Chinese to deal with the problem of North Korea or face the consequence. The end result: North Korea blinks and has to come back. Any intellectually honest person would have to conclude that this is a HUGE diplomatic victory. Bush is much smarter than “stupid” Clinton/Albright bilateral and a**kissing policy. It has been proven a failure. Thanks for reminding us of this failed policy.
BTW, we tried to pry the N. Koreans from the Chinese by providing nuclear materials to them? The Chinese wouldn’t let that happen without a war. That ‘s why Nixon wouldn’t finish off the NOrth Vietnamese communists because he didn’t want to go to war with the Chinese. Surprised that you praised Nixon and yet criticize Bush for the same policy.
BTW, the Chinese have been using the North Korean as a proxy and play the Clinton team as a fool in bilateral talk. Now we forced the Chinese to own up and at the same time we have the Japanese and South Korean directly involved in their own security. This is a brilliant and rational diplomatic strategy. The end result speaks for itself.