Archive Logo.jpg

December 05, 2006

Jules Crittenden, on "The Dream of Mature Nations"

This will incite the maple-syrup swillers, perhaps.

A number of Canadians took offense recently to a Boston Herald column in which I slammed Canada and Europe in general for failing to hold up its end in this war for democracy, freedom and security. Specificially, I slammed them for being smug democracies that do little to help the truly oppressed of this world, while throwing insults at us and obstacles in our way.

Whatever I thought about their government's attitude toward Iraq, and the insults that were leveled at our president, Canadian soldiers have been fighting and dying in Afghanistan.

I would like to commend and thank the Canadians and others for what they are doing in Afghanistan, and to express my respect for their sacrifices.

But I would still like to know where the Canadians, the French and the Germans in particular were when we needed them in Iraq ... if only to get out of the way. In fact, we could use a lot more troops in Iraq right now. More to the point, the Iraqis could use a lot more troops. They could also use the knowledge that the world actually gives a damn and is willing to stand with them, rather than always against us.

Some people say they don't want the French there ... deer hunting with an accordian. Some people say coordinating a multinational force can create as many problems as it solves. More to the point, most people would say this is all idle and pointless dreaming.

But I'm an optimist and a dreamer. Why not? Tens of thousands of troops flooding in, under NATO leadership, to engage aggressively as we've seen them do in Afghanistan. Do these nations care about Iraq? They claim to. Do they care about freedom and stability in the Middle East? They pretend to. So let's end the hypocrisy. We all know what is needed in Iraq. It isn't a pullout.

Read the rest here.

Comments on Jules Crittenden, on "The Dream of Mature Nations"
John Ryan briefed on December 5, 2006 01:13 PM

Listen Up !!
The course of the war has changed, we are on the way out. The people you work for THE AMERICAN TAXPAYERS have made their decision.
Iraq will go down in history as the worst debacle EVER for our country.
It will be shown that although a small group of men in Washington can get us into a war, it is a lot harder to get us out of one.

John of Argghhh! briefed on December 5, 2006 02:07 PM

Um, John, a few points.

1. Jules works for the Boston Herald, not The American Taxpayer.

2. I work for a commercial consulting entity, not The American Taxpayer.

3. I believe Bill now works for a commercial consulting entity, but I know he's not working for The American Taxpayer.

4. Dusty works for a commercial logistics firm, not The American Taxpayer.

5. The American Voters may have spoken, but many of them are *not* taxpayers, they get it all back and sometimes some extra, too. They do generally pay sales taxes, true, but I think, if you're going to come here and rant at us, you should at least have some verbal precision and understanding of Who We Are.

Just sayin'.

And the voters didn't explicitly say "Get out of Iraq" as much as they said, "Get us out of this mess we perceive it to be." I'm guessing the voters will be happy with a solution that doesn't "Get Us Out Of Iraq" if it evolves into a solution to the problem.

Certainly getting out of Iraq right now is one approach. But I don't think it was mandated (and, I suspect in the long run, the whole plan was to "get out of Iraq").

And I suspect that if a miracle were to occur, and what Jules is talking about were to happen - i.e., the international community truly step up to the plate - well, that solution would satisfy those taxpayers you are so interested in.

BTW - I *do* pay taxes. Enough so that I'm playing chicken with the AMT. How 'bout you?

Trias briefed on December 5, 2006 10:00 PM

Are you suggesting most Americans don't pay tax? No wonder so many want to go to America.

The only thing voters explicitly do is vote. Given the Democrats position was leaving Iraq I do think they have a reasonable mandate to leave Iraq sooner rather than later.

Jules is spouting too much bull for me to be bothered with it.

John of Argghhh! briefed on December 5, 2006 10:12 PM

Fair enough, Trias - but yes, via the arcane nature of the tax code, many Americans effectively pay little or no income tax. At both ends of the spectrum.

Oldloadr briefed on December 6, 2006 07:35 AM

1. That AMT pi$$e$ me off more than John Murtha. At least now that I'm back to being a humble technical college employee I shouldn't have to worry about it.
2. My question to John Ryan and other's from the left is, "Since you are not engaged in the war, there is no draft, the economy is surviving, most likely nobody you personally know has been killed, wounded or even deployed then why do you even care?" Could it be that the whole "anti-war" movement is either:
1. A knee-jerk reaction originating in the left's Viet Nam hangover, or...
2. An excuse to bash the right in general and the Commander-n-Chief, in particular.
I’m sure the real reason(s) for the anti-war vitriol is/are more complex than this, but probably no less ridiculous.

Post a comment









Remember personal info?