Eerie Parallel
From Michael Gordon and Alissa Rubin in the NYT:
Some Mahdi Army leaders put the death toll slightly higher. When a truce was first announced, they threatened to refuse Mr. Sadr’s order to stand down. “What about the martyrs?” a Mahdi battalion leader recently told a reporter. “A thousand martyrs, what did they die for?”
I mention this because I worry when advocates of keeping U.S. forces engaged in the fighting in Iraq make a parallel argument, i.e., when they say we need to stay in Iraq and kill militia members or insurgents to honor the sacrifice of the Americans who’ve died — advocates of withdrawal are right to say that this argument is senseless, though it has an emotional appeal to many who’ve lost comrades. If the U.S. should keep actively supporting the Iraqi government, as I think it should, it should do so because it is the best way to advance U.S. national security objectives and to meet our collective security obligations. And there’s no sense in pretending that there is an obvious answer to this question that will be pellucidly clear to all right-thinking people.
Yes, yes, yes, but “pellucidly clear” is embarrassingly bad writing.
— Sanjay · May 21, 01:50 PM · #
“If the U.S. should keep actively supporting the Iraqi government, as I think it should, it should do so because it is the best way to advance U.S. national security objectives and to meet our collective security obligations. And there’s no sense in pretending that there is an obvious answer to this question that will be pellucidly clear to all right-thinking people.”
I think that makes sense, but what do you mean by “collective security obligations?” That sounds like the fine print in a cell phone contract. And what national security objectives do you think are being advanced by our support of Iraq?
— cw · May 21, 04:04 PM · #
<i>I mention this because I worry when advocates of keeping U.S. forces engaged in the fighting in Iraq make a parallel argument</i>
Are they still doing that? The Surge and the Sunni Awakening have involved us striking deals with so many people who used to be trying to kill us that I was hoping we were past “so that they didn’t die in vain” rhetoric.
— Consumatopia · May 21, 11:57 PM · #
The Mahdi Army, most of the 1920th Revolutionary brigades, died for nothing. The staunch nationalist that became an appendage of Iran Much like those who fought in the Chinese civil war, or fought on behalf of the Viet Minh; whose cadres were all too willing to turn the country into a sweatshop. Resistance, in the Che Guevara/Carlos Marighela sense is overrated
— narciso · May 22, 04:21 AM · #