No quagmire?

The popular blog Gateway Pundit was kind enough to link to my post today on Kristof’s review of Mao and even referred to TPD as “a great blog about China,” which I really appreciate. I suspect, however, that once he sees my blogroll he’ll decide to edit that post, as we have very different, um, perspectives.

Still, one good turn deserves another, so allow me to link to Pundit’s post about how swimmingly things are going in Iraq and how there’s no signs of a quagmire.

I’d really like to believe it. Unfortunately, I just read this.

Stepped-up attacks by insurgents over the last two days have killed at least 44 Iraqis, including 12 laborers — five of them brothers — who were gunned down at a construction site, police said Monday.

In addition, the bodies of eight Iraqis who apparently were kidnapped and killed in captivity were found in the capital on Monday, police said.

Meanwhile, the toll among American service members in the
Iraq war was approaching 2,000 dead. At least 1,996 members of the U.S. military have died since the beginning of the Iraq war in March 2003, according to an Associated Press count.

Monday’s worst attack occurred in southwestern Baghdad when suspected insurgents opened fire at two civilian cars, killing three of the municipal workers they were carrying and a passer-by, said police Capt. Talib Thamir.

A suicide car bomber killed two Iraqis and wounded five in an attack on a police patrol in the northeastern neighborhood of Shaab, where insurgents had kidnapped and murdered a defense lawyer in
Saddam Hussein’s trial last week, said police Lt. Malik Sultan.

Insurgents opened fire on an Iraqi army checkpoint in western Baghdad, killing a soldier and a girl who was standing in front of her nearby house…

I guess it depends on what your definition of a quagmire is. Every day we announce we’ve killed or captured scores of terrorists, and we periodically insist the tide has turned and victory awaits us around the corner. And each time it’s countered with reality – more death and destruction, and more terrorists lined up to replace those we took out. When you’re stuck in the same place year after year with no end in sight, I think it’s safe to call it a quagmire.

The Discussion: 17 Comments

A constitutional process is going on, new political parties, a lot of newspapers, people has voted twice, will vote again in two months, ME is looking at Iraq as an experiment in building democracy and rule of law… Of course, terrorists and despots don’t agree, but this is sign of success, not of quagmire. Richard, when you talk about US, you always forget alot of things.

October 24, 2005 @ 8:12 am | Comment

Well, I guess we’ll see. Did you read today how 45 percent of Iraiqs believe terrorist strieks against US and British troops are acceptable? Elections are great and I applaud them and see them as a positive step, but the negative steps far outweigh such glimmerings of hope. You didn;t address my points as to why I see it as a quagmire – more and more terrorists oining the ranks, continued bloodhsed year after year and higher mortality rates for our soldiers and so much more. To point to pyrrhic victories like the election as proof there is no quagmire doesn’t wash with me. I’ll believe it when we’re on our way out of there. Have you been reading up on how ill-prepared the Iraqi security forces are? I really see no way out.

October 24, 2005 @ 8:19 am | Comment

Oh, an “e” (or is that bob? or jj? or anonymous?), I just noticed you’ve used at least four separate handles in your many comments. Careful; that’s a no-no.

October 24, 2005 @ 8:21 am | Comment

Ten millions iraqis voting in a country ruled by a genocidal despot until two years ago. A pyrrhic victory? You won’t never acknowledge…

October 24, 2005 @ 8:32 am | Comment

Exactly. A pyrrhic victory until we see if it really means anything. If their fredom and “democracy” is sustainable. When you have to close down the city and arm to the teeth to let people vote, I don’t see it as a good sign. I appreciate that they are voting and that they thirst for their fredom to choose. But I see no victory until I know what it is they’ve chosen and if we achieved our goals. No, cancel that last thought; we failed in our goal, which was to find WMDs. The freedom thing came later, when Biush needed something else to hitch the war to. Yes, the people of Iraq got their vote. Was it worth bankrupting the country, the deaths of 2,000 young men and women and the huge loss of our reputation worldwide? Especially since those young soldiers were sent there to find weapons that never existed, and especially since the insurgency is still so powerful we are stuck there indefinitely, especially since the people we brought liberty to want to see us murdered. Go dance in the streets if you choose; only 32 percent of the American people are dancing with you, and nearly 70 percent think you’re nuts.

October 24, 2005 @ 8:40 am | Comment

I’m nut but you don’t remember very well the story. Democracy for ME wasn’t a surrogate of WMD deal, it was one of the goals (the main goal) US administration declared before the invasion in the context of war on terror.
I’m nut but in saying that “people we brought liberty want to see us murdered”, you’re insulting many millions iraqis who have demonstrated they believe in a democratic future against every terrorist threat and every nostalgic-Saddam thug.
I’m not interested in debating with you the same issues as ever. I only wanted to point out the fundamental omissions and lies in your narrative.
There are two Richards. One about China, accurate and freedom-loving, and one about US politics, blind of prejudice and misinformed. I buy the first one.

October 24, 2005 @ 8:52 am | Comment

e, I hope you are watching TV right now. My God, what a victory.

October 24, 2005 @ 8:53 am | Comment

Good, I’m glad you like my China posts. Dude, I’m a liberal and proud to see my country moving back in the right direction.

And no, I don’t remember what you stand for because you use 4 different screen names. And you never addressed a single point I made. Go figure.

October 24, 2005 @ 8:56 am | Comment

Nazi-Com-Islamists terrorists, Richard.
We and Iraqi people are fighting against them. I’m sure you get it.

October 24, 2005 @ 9:00 am | Comment

None of them were in Iraq until we went there. Saddam had a deep fear and distrust of Islamofascists. Even Brent Scowcroft, national security advisor for Bush I, says we created this situation with our ill-planned and under-manned and sloppy invasion. Go dance in the streets.

October 24, 2005 @ 9:08 am | Comment

Well over two years and we can’t secure the 6-mile strip from the airport to Baghdad. Dance for joy.

Tonight’s explosion was monstrous. But remember, Cheney promised the insurgency was in its “last throes” many months ago. Do you buy that? Are we winning?


October 24, 2005 @ 9:10 am | Comment

A lot of clichés.
Last Saddam funded terrorists, hid them, last Saddam converted himself to radical Islam, terrorists weren’t in Iraq because in Iraq there was State-terror, they were elsewhere, Iraq war has not “created” them. We have to fight terrorists and sponsor-states, not ignore them.


October 24, 2005 @ 9:21 am | Comment

e., “WE have to fight terrorists?”

I admire your courage. How long have you been fighting in Iraq? Or are you in Afghanistan? How are the internet connections there?

(…snarling under my breath again:
“F—ing chickenhawk…..”)

October 24, 2005 @ 9:40 am | Comment

“Islamo-fascists”? Wow. E. needs to update his RNC talking points. That one is very stale.

October 24, 2005 @ 12:03 pm | Comment

He’s putting off enlisting until he can fight the REAL bad guys:

The Bozo-Fascists!

And then we will have a beachead against the Dild0-Fascists.

October 24, 2005 @ 4:55 pm | Comment

“Nazi-Com-Islamists terrorists”

What the…

how are Nazis and Islamic terrorists in anyway related?

October 25, 2005 @ 12:51 am | Comment

They’re working-men socialists.

October 25, 2005 @ 4:31 pm | Comment

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.