I wonder at the likelihood that the allegedly accidental alighting of Allah's big book becomes a watershed moment in the propping up of America's patience [that word seems ill-fitting] with the Muslim world. There's this from Commentary, the sentiments of which I generally agree with - although those who supported the effort in Afghanistan and are only now reflecting on the irremediable nature of Islamic polities I tend to scorn [some of those now questioning the Afghan mission were champions of involvent in Libya and are now most eager it seems to get it on with Syria]
But regardless of that there's a definite sense that many Americans, long now lulled into a fine stupor viz the increasingly hard to define erstwhile war on terror, have suddenly startled from their slumbers, fixed faint eyes on those dark lands, and found themselves asking aloud "tell me again what the fuck we're doing over there?". It'll be interesting to see how Gingrich does in the primaries tomorrow since he's been the most strident in his evinced disdain of Afghanistan, going so far as to demand that they apologize to us. If you see a significant bump in his numbers tomorrow that might say something - certainly with Santorum saying yesterday that the notion of the separation of church and state made him want to throw up, you might see a little mini migration back to Gingrich, who at least has going for him as recompense for being entirely unelectable the fact that he's entertaining.
[the scourges ask, but didn't I support the invasion of Iraq? Little hypocritical, no? Well... yes I reluctantly supported the invasion but made it very clear at the time that anyone who was anymore than 60/40 for or 60/40 against was not adequately paying attention - it was not at all a clear cut thing, a fact which I think has been obscured by the botched occupation - the entirely insufficient phase four of the war left all us who supported the invasion looking like fools whereas the reality is when you compensate for poor planning the rightness of the decision is still a debatable thing, still a 60/40 proposition I think - I never thought the war was anymore than tangentially about WMDs - its prime purpose was about ending the first gulf war and getting rid of Saddam as a highly destabilizing actor in the region and then possibly as consequence instantiating progressive change in the Muslim world based on the belief that Iraq represented a 'special case' ie possessed the semblance of an educated and comparatively secular middle class - in the shadow of 9/11 not at all absurd notions - but even if I simply concede that I miscalculated on Iraq, wouldn't that mean similar miscalculations in the light of Iraq are much worse? That's my point- I believe there was a legitimate albeit tentative case to be made for Iraq - but even if I accept that there really wasn't, I have at least learned from my mistakes and drawn appropriate conclusions - a great many people apparently have not done likewise]
[interesting that I haven't seen any analysis out there on what things would be like in the Mideast right now, what with the goings on of the last year, if ol' Saddam were still strutting his stuff 'round Mesopotamia. Iran's reach in the region of course has been enhanced by the liberation of Iraqi Shiites - but on the other hand, has Saddam's departure made it more or less likely that they get the bomb? Certainly Saddam wouldn't have sat idly by while Iran nuked up - nor, one imagines, would Iran have nuked up had the occupation gone well - there were intelligence reports that suggested Iran halted work on its nuclear program after the Iraq invasion because they feared they were next. My guess is there'd be convincing arguments on both sides of that question. One thing for sure, the current mess in Syria would take on a very different aspect if Saddam, great defender of the Sunni faith, were still around - hard to imagine we wouldn't be straddling the precipice of a major war if Saddam were still around to intervene on behalf of his abused brethren - gotta believe Saddam's absence dramatically alters the dynamics of the region given current upheavals - whether for better of worse would make for an interesting argument - how come no one's jumped on this?]
