<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Death Of Conventional Wisdom By A Thousand Cuts</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.oliverwillis.com/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/</link>
	<description>Like Kryptonite To Stupid</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2009 00:26:10 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: buma</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105398</link>
		<dc:creator>buma</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jul 2008 04:29:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105398</guid>
		<description>You have to admit that was good advice McCcain gave Obama about visiting Iraq. I don&#039;t know why all these wingnuts are sore about it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You have to admit that was good advice McCcain gave Obama about visiting Iraq. I don&#8217;t know why all these wingnuts are sore about it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: C.S.Strowbridge</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105397</link>
		<dc:creator>C.S.Strowbridge</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jul 2008 04:19:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105397</guid>
		<description>&quot;Will someone who disagrees please explain how to withdraw without making a schedule of some kind?&quot;

&quot;Tell the entire Iraqi nation to “Look over there” then hurry for the planes.&quot;


You need a distraction, Maybe that&#039;s why those two from The Hills are going to Iraq. 

By the way, I will officially call the Iraq war a success if those two get killed while they are there. 

Fucking hate Reality TV.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Will someone who disagrees please explain how to withdraw without making a schedule of some kind?&#8221;</p>
<p>&#8220;Tell the entire Iraqi nation to “Look over there” then hurry for the planes.&#8221;</p>
<p>You need a distraction, Maybe that&#8217;s why those two from The Hills are going to Iraq. </p>
<p>By the way, I will officially call the Iraq war a success if those two get killed while they are there. </p>
<p>Fucking hate Reality TV.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Quaker in a Basement</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105380</link>
		<dc:creator>Quaker in a Basement</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jul 2008 00:09:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105380</guid>
		<description>&quot;Say, is that Salman Rushdie?&quot;

[run, run, run, run, run, run....]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Say, is that Salman Rushdie?&#8221;</p>
<p>[run, run, run, run, run, run....]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: fafaroo</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105378</link>
		<dc:creator>fafaroo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jul 2008 23:46:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105378</guid>
		<description>&quot;Will someone who disagrees please explain how to withdraw without making a schedule of some kind?&quot;

Tell the entire Iraqi nation to &quot;Look over there&quot; then hurry for the planes.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Will someone who disagrees please explain how to withdraw without making a schedule of some kind?&#8221;</p>
<p>Tell the entire Iraqi nation to &#8220;Look over there&#8221; then hurry for the planes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Repack Rider</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105377</link>
		<dc:creator>Repack Rider</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jul 2008 23:35:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105377</guid>
		<description>Need two answers here.

First, what condition would be described as &quot;victory?&quot;  Would it be the Prime Minister asking us to start the withdrawal from a sovereign nation for which he has been democratically chosen to speak?

Second, you can&#039;t redeploy without setting time frames and goals, identifying who is leaving and in what order.  If you can&#039;t do that, then the only recourse is to stay forever.

So how can we EVER leave without putting some sort of timeline on the withdrawal?  Should it take a year?  Two?  

As an Army veteran unlike the chickenhawks who disagree with me, I say leave NOW.  Will someone who disagrees please explain how to withdraw without making a schedule of some kind?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Need two answers here.</p>
<p>First, what condition would be described as &#8220;victory?&#8221;  Would it be the Prime Minister asking us to start the withdrawal from a sovereign nation for which he has been democratically chosen to speak?</p>
<p>Second, you can&#8217;t redeploy without setting time frames and goals, identifying who is leaving and in what order.  If you can&#8217;t do that, then the only recourse is to stay forever.</p>
<p>So how can we EVER leave without putting some sort of timeline on the withdrawal?  Should it take a year?  Two?  </p>
<p>As an Army veteran unlike the chickenhawks who disagree with me, I say leave NOW.  Will someone who disagrees please explain how to withdraw without making a schedule of some kind?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: fafaroo</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105376</link>
		<dc:creator>fafaroo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jul 2008 23:24:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105376</guid>
		<description>&quot;My concern with a premature withdrawal would be to see that occur again in Iraq. We could conceivably see a government that made Iran’s look moderate, couldn’t we?&quot;

Yes, we could. But there doesn&#039;t have to be some violent take over by Islamic extremists for that to happen. It could happen entirely politically if the right groups form the right alliances and win elections. And then what are we supposed to do? Overthrow yet another Iraqi regime, this time one that has popular support?

We&#039;ve already basically turned Iran&#039;s long time mortal enemy into a friendly neighbor state if not an out an out satellite. I don&#039;t remember anyone in favor of this war acknowledging that as a real possibility and yet - here we are. This would be yet another example of how completely wrong the Bush administration and its supporters were on the invasion and occupation. Anyone who thought about it for a few minutes before the invasion should have realized that this was a definite possibility given the ethnic make up of Iraq.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;My concern with a premature withdrawal would be to see that occur again in Iraq. We could conceivably see a government that made Iran’s look moderate, couldn’t we?&#8221;</p>
<p>Yes, we could. But there doesn&#8217;t have to be some violent take over by Islamic extremists for that to happen. It could happen entirely politically if the right groups form the right alliances and win elections. And then what are we supposed to do? Overthrow yet another Iraqi regime, this time one that has popular support?</p>
<p>We&#8217;ve already basically turned Iran&#8217;s long time mortal enemy into a friendly neighbor state if not an out an out satellite. I don&#8217;t remember anyone in favor of this war acknowledging that as a real possibility and yet &#8211; here we are. This would be yet another example of how completely wrong the Bush administration and its supporters were on the invasion and occupation. Anyone who thought about it for a few minutes before the invasion should have realized that this was a definite possibility given the ethnic make up of Iraq.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Parthenon</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105373</link>
		<dc:creator>Parthenon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jul 2008 23:02:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105373</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;This idea that the “insurgency” will wait us out is just bullshit. How people can still say that after five years of violence boggles the mind. No has been “waiting us out.”&lt;/i&gt;

What you wrote sounds basically correct to me Fafaroo. I probably go to this parallel too often, but I was thinking of how quickly the North overwhelmed S. Vietnam as the Americans &#039;Vietnamized&#039; the war. My concern with a premature withdrawal would be to see that occur again in Iraq. We could conceivably see a government that made Iran&#039;s look moderate, couldn&#039;t we? The growth of a &quot;Shi&#039;a crescent&quot; that so concerns the other gulf states?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>This idea that the “insurgency” will wait us out is just bullshit. How people can still say that after five years of violence boggles the mind. No has been “waiting us out.”</i></p>
<p>What you wrote sounds basically correct to me Fafaroo. I probably go to this parallel too often, but I was thinking of how quickly the North overwhelmed S. Vietnam as the Americans &#8216;Vietnamized&#8217; the war. My concern with a premature withdrawal would be to see that occur again in Iraq. We could conceivably see a government that made Iran&#8217;s look moderate, couldn&#8217;t we? The growth of a &#8220;Shi&#8217;a crescent&#8221; that so concerns the other gulf states?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Parthenon</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105372</link>
		<dc:creator>Parthenon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jul 2008 22:58:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105372</guid>
		<description>Zoinks, it&#039;s another syntax duel. As usual, the words are in shades of grey and we appear to be arguing in blacks and whites. This one depends upon the speaker&#039;s use of the word &#039;war.&#039; When I use the phrase &#039;pro-war,&#039; I typically use it in the context of &#039;pro-Iraq war,&#039; not pro-war in general. And I&#039;ll use it to describe those people who in late 2002 and eary 2003 were in favor of starting a war against a country who had not committed a hostile action against ours. That point cannot be argued, unless you want to barrel into some tin-foil-hattery regarding links to al-Qaeda, and I don&#039;t know anybody who supports that with much fervor anymore. 

So pro-war means &#039;in favor of starting the war six years ago,&#039; and also &#039;in favor of finishing the war in a state of little to no violence in Iraq and leaving the Iraqi military with only mop-up duty, as that is the best thing for Iraqi and American security.&#039; It doesn&#039;t mean &#039;in favor of continuing the war indefinitely.&#039; That&#039;s a bad representation of the conservative Iraq war position. So it may be a little oversensitive for 2002 regime change advocates to be offended by the pro-war terminology. 

As Quaker has already pointed out, &#039;pro-war&#039; and &#039;pro-abortion&#039; are basically apples and oranges. War advocates argued that our country had a right to start a war with no overt cause, in the face of the largest international protests in history, and with an international coalition built primarily on political favors. In that way, they argued for, essentially unilateral rights of war, so pro-war might equate with &#039;pro-unilateral abortion rights,&#039; but not &#039;pro-abortion.&#039;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Zoinks, it&#8217;s another syntax duel. As usual, the words are in shades of grey and we appear to be arguing in blacks and whites. This one depends upon the speaker&#8217;s use of the word &#8216;war.&#8217; When I use the phrase &#8216;pro-war,&#8217; I typically use it in the context of &#8216;pro-Iraq war,&#8217; not pro-war in general. And I&#8217;ll use it to describe those people who in late 2002 and eary 2003 were in favor of starting a war against a country who had not committed a hostile action against ours. That point cannot be argued, unless you want to barrel into some tin-foil-hattery regarding links to al-Qaeda, and I don&#8217;t know anybody who supports that with much fervor anymore. </p>
<p>So pro-war means &#8216;in favor of starting the war six years ago,&#8217; and also &#8216;in favor of finishing the war in a state of little to no violence in Iraq and leaving the Iraqi military with only mop-up duty, as that is the best thing for Iraqi and American security.&#8217; It doesn&#8217;t mean &#8216;in favor of continuing the war indefinitely.&#8217; That&#8217;s a bad representation of the conservative Iraq war position. So it may be a little oversensitive for 2002 regime change advocates to be offended by the pro-war terminology. </p>
<p>As Quaker has already pointed out, &#8216;pro-war&#8217; and &#8216;pro-abortion&#8217; are basically apples and oranges. War advocates argued that our country had a right to start a war with no overt cause, in the face of the largest international protests in history, and with an international coalition built primarily on political favors. In that way, they argued for, essentially unilateral rights of war, so pro-war might equate with &#8216;pro-unilateral abortion rights,&#8217; but not &#8216;pro-abortion.&#8217;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: fafaroo</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105370</link>
		<dc:creator>fafaroo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jul 2008 22:39:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105370</guid>
		<description>&quot;The hell with you then. I won’t waste my time.&quot;

I had no idea you were such a fragile, delicate soul, Jay. Is this what it sounds like when dove&#039;s cry?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;The hell with you then. I won’t waste my time.&#8221;</p>
<p>I had no idea you were such a fragile, delicate soul, Jay. Is this what it sounds like when dove&#8217;s cry?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Quaker in a Basement</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105367</link>
		<dc:creator>Quaker in a Basement</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jul 2008 22:24:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105367</guid>
		<description>&lt;em&gt;Actually, I said nothing about ‘civility.’&lt;/em&gt;

&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105330&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Sure you did:&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;blockquote&gt;Hey Oliver, I’ve been as civil as possible on these comments about not calling people “pro-whatever” but if you want, I can easily do that.&lt;/blockquote&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>Actually, I said nothing about ‘civility.’</em></p>
<p><a href="http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105330" rel="nofollow">Sure you did:</a></p>
<blockquote><p>Hey Oliver, I’ve been as civil as possible on these comments about not calling people “pro-whatever” but if you want, I can easily do that.</p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Quaker in a Basement</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105366</link>
		<dc:creator>Quaker in a Basement</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jul 2008 22:23:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105366</guid>
		<description>&lt;em&gt;Merely as a way of showing you how your assertion that those who support the Iraq War are “pro-war” is wrong. Again: You support abortion rights. Does that make you “pro-abortion”, yes or no? It’s a simple question.&lt;/em&gt;

You are deflecting (by your own admission) and equating things that are not equal.

Perhaps another time.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>Merely as a way of showing you how your assertion that those who support the Iraq War are “pro-war” is wrong. Again: You support abortion rights. Does that make you “pro-abortion”, yes or no? It’s a simple question.</em></p>
<p>You are deflecting (by your own admission) and equating things that are not equal.</p>
<p>Perhaps another time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jay</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105363</link>
		<dc:creator>Jay</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jul 2008 22:03:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105363</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;Gee, I can’t wait.&lt;/i&gt;

The hell with you then. I won&#039;t waste my time.

&lt;i&gt;But it’s incivil to call these people “pro-war”?&lt;/i&gt;

Actually, I said nothing about &#039;civility.&#039; I said it was incorrect. 

&lt;i&gt;I’m deflecting? You’re the one who brought abortion into it.&lt;/i&gt;

Merely as a way of showing you how your assertion that those who support the Iraq War are &quot;pro-war&quot; is wrong. Again: You support abortion rights. Does that make you &quot;pro-abortion&quot;, yes or no? It&#039;s a simple question.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>Gee, I can’t wait.</i></p>
<p>The hell with you then. I won&#8217;t waste my time.</p>
<p><i>But it’s incivil to call these people “pro-war”?</i></p>
<p>Actually, I said nothing about &#8216;civility.&#8217; I said it was incorrect. </p>
<p><i>I’m deflecting? You’re the one who brought abortion into it.</i></p>
<p>Merely as a way of showing you how your assertion that those who support the Iraq War are &#8220;pro-war&#8221; is wrong. Again: You support abortion rights. Does that make you &#8220;pro-abortion&#8221;, yes or no? It&#8217;s a simple question.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Duros62</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105361</link>
		<dc:creator>Duros62</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jul 2008 21:46:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105361</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;But it’s uncivil to call these people “pro-war”?&lt;/i&gt;

Their feelings are easily hurt, poor things.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>But it’s uncivil to call these people “pro-war”?</i></p>
<p>Their feelings are easily hurt, poor things.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Duros62</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105360</link>
		<dc:creator>Duros62</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jul 2008 21:43:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105360</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;Unfortunately, your conclusion is based on the (incorrect) assumption that I am saying terrorists are just lying in wait, hoping for all the troops to leave so they can spring out of their hiding spots and go terror crazy.&lt;/i&gt;

Isn&#039;t that exactly what you guys were saying about a year or so ago?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>Unfortunately, your conclusion is based on the (incorrect) assumption that I am saying terrorists are just lying in wait, hoping for all the troops to leave so they can spring out of their hiding spots and go terror crazy.</i></p>
<p>Isn&#8217;t that exactly what you guys were saying about a year or so ago?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: fafaroo</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105356</link>
		<dc:creator>fafaroo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jul 2008 20:58:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105356</guid>
		<description>&quot;I’ll expand more on it later.&quot;

Gee, I can&#039;t wait.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;I’ll expand more on it later.&#8221;</p>
<p>Gee, I can&#8217;t wait.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: fafaroo</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105355</link>
		<dc:creator>fafaroo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jul 2008 20:57:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105355</guid>
		<description>&quot;Running away was never a good solution.&quot;

Yeah, right up until the Iraqi government said it&#039;s time for us to start leaving. 

Reducing and limiting the US presence in Iraq was always the key to political progress and reducing violence. Our presence there is part of the problem. The Right&#039;s characterization of withdrawal as &quot;retreat&quot; or &quot;surrender&quot; for it&#039;s own domestic political purposes is one of the biggest travesties/tragedies of the whole botched endeavor.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Running away was never a good solution.&#8221;</p>
<p>Yeah, right up until the Iraqi government said it&#8217;s time for us to start leaving. </p>
<p>Reducing and limiting the US presence in Iraq was always the key to political progress and reducing violence. Our presence there is part of the problem. The Right&#8217;s characterization of withdrawal as &#8220;retreat&#8221; or &#8220;surrender&#8221; for it&#8217;s own domestic political purposes is one of the biggest travesties/tragedies of the whole botched endeavor.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Quaker in a Basement</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105354</link>
		<dc:creator>Quaker in a Basement</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jul 2008 20:57:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105354</guid>
		<description>&lt;em&gt;Except I’m not equivocating the two scenarios and that’s merely a weak attempt at deflection on your part to accuse me of doing so. &lt;/em&gt;

I&#039;m deflecting? You&#039;re the one who brought abortion into it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>Except I’m not equivocating the two scenarios and that’s merely a weak attempt at deflection on your part to accuse me of doing so. </em></p>
<p>I&#8217;m deflecting? You&#8217;re the one who brought abortion into it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Quaker in a Basement</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105353</link>
		<dc:creator>Quaker in a Basement</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jul 2008 20:55:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105353</guid>
		<description>OK, let&#039;s summarize:

Some people believe the invasion of Iraq was legally and morally justified. They supported the president&#039;s decision to start the war with a massive bombing campaign. They dismissed those who wanted more time for inspections. They scoffed at those who wanted to seek another authorization from the U.N. They reviled those who said the war would be costly in both lives and money. They urged the president to continue the war and the occupation. They call it &quot;partisan&quot; to mention the number of lives lost. They accuse those who want to bring our troops home of &quot;surrender.&quot;

But it&#039;s incivil to call these people &quot;pro-war&quot;?

Then I won&#039;t describe the other thoughts that cross my mind. They are far worse.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>OK, let&#8217;s summarize:</p>
<p>Some people believe the invasion of Iraq was legally and morally justified. They supported the president&#8217;s decision to start the war with a massive bombing campaign. They dismissed those who wanted more time for inspections. They scoffed at those who wanted to seek another authorization from the U.N. They reviled those who said the war would be costly in both lives and money. They urged the president to continue the war and the occupation. They call it &#8220;partisan&#8221; to mention the number of lives lost. They accuse those who want to bring our troops home of &#8220;surrender.&#8221;</p>
<p>But it&#8217;s incivil to call these people &#8220;pro-war&#8221;?</p>
<p>Then I won&#8217;t describe the other thoughts that cross my mind. They are far worse.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JWG</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105352</link>
		<dc:creator>JWG</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jul 2008 20:52:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105352</guid>
		<description>It is great watching all you &quot;the war is lost&quot; types spinning so hard. Obama was wrong. You were wrong. Running away was never a good solution.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is great watching all you &#8220;the war is lost&#8221; types spinning so hard. Obama was wrong. You were wrong. Running away was never a good solution.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jay</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105350</link>
		<dc:creator>Jay</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jul 2008 20:45:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2008/07/21/the-death-of-conventional-wisdom-by-a-thousand-cuts/#comment-105350</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;And I was pointing out that it is a false equivalence.&lt;/i&gt;

Except I&#039;m not equivocating the two scenarios and that&#039;s merely a weak attempt at deflection on your part to accuse me of doing so. Are you &quot;pro-abortion&quot; because you support abortion rights, yes or no?

&lt;i&gt;Do try to put a couple of paragraphs between your contradictions. It makes them less glaring.&lt;/i&gt;

Nice try, except there is no contradiction. If you if you determine to do something you don&#039;t want to do, you&#039;re not being &lt;b&gt;forced&lt;/b&gt; to do it. You&#039;re still making the choice. IE, it&#039;s elective. Comprende? 

&lt;i&gt;Jay, please explain why you think setting 2010 as a target withdrawal date is “a terrible idea.”&lt;/i&gt;

Fafaroo, setting any arbitrary date is a terrible idea. Gotta run now. I&#039;ll expand more on it later.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>And I was pointing out that it is a false equivalence.</i></p>
<p>Except I&#8217;m not equivocating the two scenarios and that&#8217;s merely a weak attempt at deflection on your part to accuse me of doing so. Are you &#8220;pro-abortion&#8221; because you support abortion rights, yes or no?</p>
<p><i>Do try to put a couple of paragraphs between your contradictions. It makes them less glaring.</i></p>
<p>Nice try, except there is no contradiction. If you if you determine to do something you don&#8217;t want to do, you&#8217;re not being <b>forced</b> to do it. You&#8217;re still making the choice. IE, it&#8217;s elective. Comprende? </p>
<p><i>Jay, please explain why you think setting 2010 as a target withdrawal date is “a terrible idea.”</i></p>
<p>Fafaroo, setting any arbitrary date is a terrible idea. Gotta run now. I&#8217;ll expand more on it later.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
