Peter Beinart: Still Wrong!

January 18th, 2009 Iraq Useful "Liberals" 27 Comments


('DiggThis’)

Share

One of the top DC insider “liberals” in favor of the Iraq War still gets everything wrong! If Democrats listened to “liberals” like Peter Beinart, we would be discussing John McCain’s inauguration right now.

Posted in Iraq, Useful "Liberals" |
«
»
Both comments and pings are currently closed.

27 Responses to “Peter Beinart: Still Wrong!”

  1. Jay Tea says:
    January 18, 2009 at 7:27 am

    Beinart (who wrote a truly great political novel, “American Hero,” that was absolutely gutted when made into “Wag The Dog”) understands what Oliver’s compatriot does not: the “Surge” was a hell of a lot more than more troops. It was a complete top-to-bottom reworking of the whole strategy in Iraq, a ruthless gutting of failed and less than successful ideas and an entirely new approach to counterinsurgency. It was the culmination of General Petraeus’ years of research and thought and planning on how to deal with what promises to be an increasing threat in the world (asymettrical warfare, irregular allies and enemies, failed and failing nation-states, rampant factionalism, proxy wars, and a host of other really, really bad things) put from theory into practice.

    And it worked.

    It worked so well that Harry Reid, who pronounced it a failure before it even started, is now claiming credit for it.

    It worked so well that most of the mainstream media has pulled out their reporters and don’t talk about Iraq — because “no news is good news,” and good news doesn’t sell.

    It worked so well that Joe Biden is frantically hoping no one remembers his idea of a few years ago to partition Iraq into three separate states.

    It worked so well that Iran got frustrated and started causing trouble in Gaza.

    No, it hasn’t played out completely. It can still fail. But right now, it’s working out pretty damned well — and a damned sight better than its critics said it would.

    Oliver’s vaunted source here (I’ve learned to follow the links — when Oliver says something incredibly vapid and shallow, it usually means that he has no original thoughts of his own to express, and just lets others do his talking and thinking for him) focuses on one aspect of the “Surge” strategy and faults it because it didn’t account for all the successes. Well, duh. It was only part of the equation. A key part, but not the whole thing. It was the whole strategy (which neither Oliver nor his source here) don’t seem to be able to grasp.

    Big surprise.

    J.

  2. Jaim says:
    January 18, 2009 at 7:35 am

    “And it worked.”

    No, it didn’t. The point of the surge was to give some breathing room to the Iraqi government to actually stabilize and set itself up as something other than an American puppet-state.

    As someone commented over at Lawyers, Guns, and Money, saying the surge worked is like being the MVP of the Detroit Lions. The Iraqi government is not effectively ruling its own country. It is led by people who are literally good friends with the regime in Iran. It is filled with people who actively dislike America.

    Victory in Iraq now means establishing a semi-stable, self-sufficient government. We are no closer to that now than we were.

    And as the American economy continues to suffer, we’re spending a billion dollars a weak to try and prop up a failed state that hates us and supports Iran, Hezbollah, and Hamas. In the _best case scenario_ we get a stable, anti-American, pro-Iranian government. At worst? Mere chaos. Expensive chaos at that.

  3. Oliver Willis says:
    January 18, 2009 at 7:45 am

    I’ve learned to follow the links
    That sort of tells you everything you need to know. Jaytea wants me to write an essay every time I link to something but when I scroll up to the top of this page it says Oliver Willis, which means I can link any way the fuck I please, thankyouverymuch.

    As for the surge, as I’ve said, of course violence would tamp down when you’ve got such a huge amount of Americans babysitting Iraq. But we can’t babysit the Iraqis for all eternity.

    UPDATE: I knew something else sounded wrong about your post. Larry Beinhart, not Peter Beinart, wrote American Hero.

    “Better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt”

    The JayTea rule?

  4. Jaim says:
    January 18, 2009 at 7:56 am

    Christ Jay, you’re like the little girl who runs over and pinches Oliver to get his attention than runs away saying “Eww! Boys are yucky!”

    You constantly monitor this site for new posts from O-dub so you can get in first. Honestly, although I’ve only been to your blog once, I’d imagine you probably spend about as much time here as you do working on things there, if not more.

    So, to paraphrase Jerry Seinfeld (or was it Woody Allen?): “The food here is so f’ing terrible at Oliver Willis’ house of Democratic blogging! And the portions are so small!”

    I mean, it’s your right to be obsessed with this place. But I’m going to be honest with ya’: You’re getting creepier by the day.

  5. Jay Tea says:
    January 18, 2009 at 10:37 am

    My apologies for disrupting the acoustics of your magnificent echo chamber. Or would “disrupting a circle jerk” be a better metaphor?

    J.

  6. August J. Pollak says:
    January 18, 2009 at 10:53 am

    Or would “disrupting a circle jerk” be a better metaphor?

    Way to stay classy, Huggybuns.

  7. Dennis says:
    January 18, 2009 at 12:18 pm

    “Blogging . . . I would say 95%; maybe 99% of blogging is basically therapy for the blogger.”

    –Mike Barnicle

    Truer words.

  8. ed says:
    January 18, 2009 at 12:44 pm

    Chickenhawks like Peter Beinart, Jay Tea, and Dennis really didn’t do the U.S. any favors by aiding and abetting the Iraq Invasion. What a disgraceful legacy they leave behind.

  9. ed says:
    January 18, 2009 at 2:25 pm

    First sentence of Beinart’s ultimate graf:

    Being proven right too many times is dangerous.

    Somehow, I don’t see this as being a problem for young (i.e., fighting age) Mr. Beinart.

  10. Scary Evil Monkey says:
    January 18, 2009 at 3:33 pm

    beinart no fight in war so hee wrong. if surge werked, y hee no fight? make no cense!

  11. Sean D. Martin says:
    January 18, 2009 at 4:37 pm

    Scary Evil Monkey: beinart no fight in war so hee wrong. if surge werked, y hee no fight? make no cense!

    Oddly phrased (Kids these days.) but I wouldn’t mind seeing the cries of “chickenhawk” fall by the wayside either.

    “If you’re so in favor of the war and/or the surge, why didn’t you enlist you coward chickenhawk?” Please.

    as if everyone who has opposed them has actively arranged and organized protests and actions against it.

    Worthless accusations from both sides.

  12. Amused Observer says:
    January 18, 2009 at 7:21 pm

    LOL,
    ed loves his chicken hawk theme. The Democrats who called the war a failure are basically traitors, doing everything in their power to weaken the president and our nation in time of war. They would rather lose a war than give help Bush win one. When push comes to shove liberals like ed are basically to weak to stomach the hard things that have to be done from time to time.

  13. Jaim says:
    January 18, 2009 at 7:25 pm

    Bush and the Republicans have already lost both wars for us due to incompetence.

    And btw, Bush is out on his ass in less than 24 hours and America can begin rebuilding. Get used to it.

  14. Jay Tea says:
    January 18, 2009 at 8:40 pm

    “Blogging . . . I would say 95%; maybe 99% of blogging is basically therapy for the blogger.”

    –Mike Barnicle

    OK, Barnicle said it. But who said it FIRST for Barnicle to lift from? Or did he just make this up, too?

    Remember, Barnicle was fired by the Boston Globe for plagiarism and just plain making up stuff in his columns.

    J.

  15. Johnny Pez says:
    January 18, 2009 at 9:06 pm

    If Democrats listened to “liberals” like Peter Beinart, we would be discussing John McCain’s inauguration right now.

    I must respectfully disagree. Getting McCain into the White House would have required a Democrat who was listening to Peter Beinart and Mark Penn, at the very least.

  16. Zython says:
    January 18, 2009 at 9:18 pm

    When push comes to shove liberals like ed are basically to weak to stomach the hard things that have to be done from time to time.

    The Iraq War DIDN’T need to happen, dumbass.

    The Democrats who called the war a failure are basically traitors,

    How DARE they say driving off a cliff is a bad idea! Those dirty traitors!

    doing everything in their power to weaken the president and our nation in time of war. They would rather lose a war than give help Bush win one.

    Why would anyone trust the people who got us into this mess to solve it? Would you trust an arsonist to put out a house fire? Anyhow, I take it you’re going to set an example for us “traitors” by supporting President Obama?

    Poor AO, if you hate America so much, you should just move back to Saudi Arabia or Antarctica.

  17. Jaim says:
    January 18, 2009 at 9:27 pm

    You mean AO isn’t actually serving in Iraq and defending our freedoms?

    I’m shocked!

    /next post from AO: “Well, my knee is sore and the doctor says I have an ouchie on my vagina so I can’t go BUT I STILL MAKE SACRIFICES AND HAVE A YELLOW MAGNETIC RIBBON ON MY SUV!!!”

  18. Amused Observer says:
    January 18, 2009 at 9:52 pm

    Zython,
    As long as Obama doesn’t give away our sovereignty, drastically increase inflation, ruin our health care system
    with rationing, fold on national defense, erode our Constitution, or cripple our economy with global warming nonsense I’ll support him. Obama is going to piss off more people on the left than the right with any luck.

    This is a great country, it’s just too bad people like you want to turn it into another Europe.

  19. Bruce Henry says:
    January 19, 2009 at 7:53 am

    “an ouchie on my vagina”
    That was the funniest thing I ever read on this site. Jaim, you are awesome.

  20. Duros62 says:
    January 19, 2009 at 12:30 pm

    As long as Obama doesn’t give away our sovereignty, drastically increase inflation, ruin our health care system with rationing, fold on national defense, erode our Constitution, or cripple our economy with global warming nonsense I’ll support him.

    You really haven’t been listening all this time, have you? The guys’s a Constitutional Law TEACHER. I think he knows what it says better than any of us. and better than any of the clowns in the White House now as well.

  21. Quaker in a Basement says:
    January 19, 2009 at 12:39 pm

    UPDATE: I knew something else sounded wrong about your post. Larry Beinhart, not Peter Beinart, wrote American Hero.

    What? Mr. Tea got the simplest facts wrong?

    An oddity, I’m sure. One off. A rare misstep. We should focus instead on the Meat of the Post and rest assured that Mr. Tea has made no further errors of any importance.

  22. C.S.Strowbridge says:
    January 19, 2009 at 1:04 pm

    J. G. Thayer: “the “Surge” was a hell of a lot more than more troops. It was a complete top-to-bottom reworking of the whole strategy in Iraq, a ruthless gutting of failed and less than successful ideas and an entirely new approach to counterinsurgency. It was the culmination of General Petraeus’ years of research and thought and planning on how to deal with what promises to be an increasing threat in the world (asymettrical warfare, irregular allies and enemies, failed and failing nation-states, rampant factionalism, proxy wars, and a host of other really, really bad things) put from theory into practice.”

    Umm…. most of this started before the Surge started. So how can it be part of the Surge?

    Me thinks you want to give credit where credit is not due.

  23. C.S.Strowbridge says:
    January 19, 2009 at 1:06 pm

    J. G. Thayer: “My apologies for disrupting the acoustics of your magnificent echo chamber. Or would “disrupting a circle jerk” be a better metaphor?”

    Translation…

    I know I was wrong, but I’m going to pretend I wasn’t. I’m going to pretend you are attacking me not based on the substance of my mistakes, but you are attacking me only because I disagree with you.

  24. C.S.Strowbridge says:
    January 19, 2009 at 1:12 pm

    Amused Observer: “LOL,”

    Unless you are 13 years old, or younger, you shouldn’t use LOL. And there’s no excuse for using it in a political discussion.

    “ed loves his chicken hawk theme. The Democrats who called the war a failure are basically traitors…”

    Oh Jesus. Now you are taking your talking points from Anne Coulter. Listen, you don’t know what the definition of the word traitor is. Otherwise, you would be declaring the Republicans traitors for their attacks against Clinton during the Kosovo War.

  25. Sean D. Martin says:
    January 19, 2009 at 1:48 pm

    CSS: Listen, you don’t know what the definition of the word traitor is.

    Sure he does.

    Traitor
    trai⋅tor
       /ˈtreɪtər/
    –noun
    1. a person who fails to completely support a Republican

  26. Jaim says:
    January 19, 2009 at 7:14 pm

    “What? Mr. Tea got the simplest facts wrong?”

    Hey man, at least it’s an ethos.

Oliver Willis

Contact
Email: owillis@gmail.com
Twitter
Facebook
Flickr
AIM: oliverwill
Huffington Post Columns
Media Matters Blog Entries