Edwards and Richardson are both worth watching. Edwards, while he hasn’t gotten the national press that Obama and Clinton have, is certainly going to be one of the last Democrats standing. And Richardson is the most qualified nominee in the race–just about any other year, he would be a front runner. Now he’s a dark horse.
The Pentagon released a transcript today of a confession by Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, alleged former head of al Qaeda operations and one of the masterminds of the 9/11 attacks. (Click here for the transcript, or here for the Washington Post article.) In the confession, Mohammed admits to being in charge of planning, organization, and funding, for any number of terrorist attacks, including the 9/11 attacks, the 1993 World Trade Center Bombings, and the destruction of a nightclub in Bali. Additionally, he admits to planning numerous other attacks on visible targets throughout the United States and around the world. While these claims should be taken with a grain of salt–he apparently has a reputation for exaggerating his role–he is undoubtedly a terrorist, and many of his claims are credible.
Mar 152007
In an interview yesterday with the New York Times, Senator Clinton provided exactly the kind of detail about her Iraq position that I’d been hoping for. In a nutshell, she said that she would support a phased withdrawal of troops from Iraq, assuming that President Bush maintains essentially the current troop levels until he leaves office (as he has stated he will). She also said that she would support a relatively small force remaining in Iraq, with the sole purpose of dealing with al Qaeda and other international terrorist threats, but that this force would not actively patrol, would be based outside of Baghdad, and would not interfere in intra-Iraqi sectarian violence. She also said that she would support the current Senate resolution to withdraw troops by Spring 2008.
While I’m skeptical of her proposed skeleton force having any ability to make a real impact, I appreciate the fact that she has taken a studied and nuanced position on the issue, and I laud her for taking the time to go beyond the usual campaign rhetoric.
Mar 142007
I was watching the Senate debate the latest Iraq resolution, and I saw Senators John McCain (R-AZ) and Jack Reed (D-RI) put the war in stark contrast. On the one hand, Senator Reed argued that there needs to be a political solution in Iraq before any long-term security solution can be reached. The American military presence, Senator Reed went on to say, isn’t helping the political situation, which is bad and deteriorating. The only hope is that the threat of withdrawal will force the Iraqis to get their act together; and if it doesn’t, then we don’t need to have an open-ended commitment in someone else’s civil war, that could last for many years. Senator McCain, on the other hand, argued that in fact a stable security environment is a necessary precondition for a political solution. Therefore we ought to commit the troops that are necessary to provide Iraq with a stable security environment, wait for them to implement whatever political arrangement they decide, and only then think about withdrawal. To withdraw now, by this logic, would set back the Iraqi path to security, and put off a political settlement indefinitely.
Mar 142007
I saw an advertisement recently for a new TV series about Robin Hood. Allow me to tell the Robin Hood story – an illegitimate government takes over and starts imposing its will on the people. Rather than allowing this government to reign free, Robin Hood fights back – robbing from the rich and giving to the poor (although the cynic in me believes that not all the money from the rich is going to the poor as his PR might suggest). When the troops come after him, he melts into the forest to hide, or hides among the populace.
And he is widely regarded in the west as a hero – so much so that there’s a Disney movie about him, several other movies, and now a tv series. This gets me thinking about the Middle East. I can’t stand Hamas, which I believe to be one of the biggest obstacles to peace in the region. However, they fight an authority that is perceived as illegitimate by many Palestinians, and give to the poor (Hamas has a charity wing). In a way, the same psychological principles that make Westerners idolize Robin Hood are probably in play when Palestinians elect Hamas to leadership positions. And similar parallels could also be drawn in Iraq.
And this makes me rethink the Robin Hood story. We never hear the story from Prince John’s or the Sheriff of Nottingham’s side. To what extent was Robin Hood a hero, and to what extent was he a terrorist? What I find amazing is that millions of Americans will be watching this show and rooting against Prince John, while at the same time completely unaware that given the way the U.S. is perceived in many parts of the world, we are in a way metaphorically cheering against ourselves.
And I wonder if we could use our own reaction to stories like Robin Hood to better understand why we’re having so much trouble in the Middle East. Something to think about…
Recent Comments