Wednesday, March 30, 2005

Lee H. Hamilton's take on Iraq

My daddy-o forwarded this article to me yesterday from the Woodrow Wilson International It's pretty good overall, but I think he shorts the following
  • Finding Bin Ladin/shoring up homeland security
  • Finishing in Afganistan
  • missinformation/deceit regarding WMD
In conclusion he muses
"Only time and events will tell whether the Iraq war has been worth the costs, and whether our decision to go to war will make us safer from – or more susceptible to –terrorist attack. "
One can make distinctions between military targets and civilian targets, but 1500 dead and 11,300 wounded doesn't seem so different from 9/11 casualties, nor the methodology seem so different from conventional terrorism. In short, terrorists didn't have to strike here, we sent them our kids instead.

Include those points, and I think it's fair to say, that yes, some positive gains were made, but look at the opportunity cost interms of diplomacy, fiscal health, homeland security, energy policy that were lost. No, it wasn't worth these costs.

Labels: ,


Blogger Steve said...

Only time will tell...If there's any cop-out that deserves our scorn, it's this. The fact that Lee Hamilton failed to consider the details you mention indicates that he fails to grasp the far-reaching consequences of the rush to war. How much time, Lee? How many dead soldiers, broken families, and shattered alliances will it take to justify declaring this war a disaster? As a co-chair of the 9/11 commission, Lee was part of a toothless whitewash that held none accountable. What changes for the better have resulted from the 9/11 commission? In my opinion, he's all whimper and rationalization, signifying nothing, to paraphrase McBeth. Out, brief candle!

Thursday, 31 March, 2005  
Blogger Terry Finley said...

Nice Blog. Thank you.

Civil war is disastrous.

Come visit me:

Terry Finley

Thursday, 07 April, 2005  

Post a Comment

<< Home