December 13, 2005

Hearing a lefty appeaser say "his heart sinks," is always music to my ears...

A Hungry Eye for Damascus?
By H.D.S. Greenway, boston Globe, December 13, 2005
MY HEART SANK when I read that Syrian exile Farid Ghadry met recently with Ahmed Chalabi, Iraq's deputy prime minister, in a Washington suburb. Ghadry heads something called the Syrian Reform Party. The party was formed three years ago, and is made up almost entirely of exiles, such as Ghadry, who left Syria when he was 10. ''Ahmed paved the way in Iraq for what we want to do in Syria," Ghadry told The Wall Street Journal.
Sounds good to me...What could Mr Greenway be bothered about?
The real heart-sinker was that the two met in the living room of Richard Pearl, whom George Packer, author of ''The Assassins' Gate," calls the ''impresario of the neo-cons." Pearl was among the leading intellectual lights urging forceful regime change in Iraq.
For excellent reasons...and one of them is that it would lead to the fatal weakening of the terror-supporting Syrian regime. And so it has happened. We ARE in a war, you know. Destroying our enemies is the whole idea.

Pearl told the Journal that ''there's no reason to think engagement with Syria will bring about any change," and he is worried that the conquistador zeal to spread democracy is diminishing within the Bush administration. Syria's strongman Bashir Assad ''has never been weaker, and we should take advantage of that," according to Pearl.
Mr Perle (not "Pearl," stupid) helped start the earthquake shaking, and the foes of democracy, such as Greenway, will not be able to stop it. Assad is doomed, one way or the other.
And so regime change raises its head to hiss once again. But selling that apple to the Eves in the Bush administration won't be so easy this time around. Things have gone so badly in Iraq that I hope regime change won't gain a lot of traction outside of Vice President Cheney's office.
The great pity of the world is that the excellent Mr Cheney is too old to run for President in '08. As it happens, things are going WELL in Iraq, which means that forceful regime-change in Syria will NOT be necessary. But it helps to PRETEND that it could come at any time. Which may be what this meeting is "about." Once again the "warmongers" are pushing peaceful change, and the appeasers are undercutting it, making the use force more likely.
I doubt that Donald Rumsfeld will be all that interested in Syrian nation building. In Iraq he was less interested in the messianic urge to implant democracy than he was in the 9/11-given opportunity to prove his theories about a new, lightning-fast, American military. To achieve that end he single-mindedly focused on the race to Baghdad, refusing to even consider that getting to Baghdad might not mean mission accomplished, but only the beginning of a guerilla war.
Nonetheless, the job gets done. And the terrorists and Ba'athists and Western media allies would have attacked ANY democratic Iraqi government. No doubt Greenway would have solved that by installing a new dictator, and avoiding nasty democracy. Fortunately he will never have any power or influence whatsoever.
The quagmire of Iraq has not only damaged his army...
Bullshit. The biggest problem any army has is not getting the experience that only combat can provide. Our forces are clearly far more deadly and effective than they were three years ago. And our combat soldiers in Iraq are re-enlisting in record numbers--they know.
..but guaranteed Rumsfeld's place in history as one of the secretaries of war who did the most harm to his country. When it comes to Syria, one hopes he would follow his own dictum: ''When you are in a hole, stop digging."
Fortunately, it's the terrorists and their media allies who are in a hole, not us. But anyway, your whole point is just stupid--Rumsfeld's not calling the shots. He's just a TOOL...
But the neo-conservative agenda is not just spreading democracy. It's American dominance -- ''benevolent world hegemony," as William Kristol and Robert Kagan call it.
The Neocons are also just tools. The only agenda that matters is that of Bush and Rice. And they would best be described as "Theocons."
As for Chalabi, he is often accused of seducing the administration with false intelligence into invading Iraq. But the fact is that the Bush administration desperately wanted to be seduced. If you are feeling charitable, you can say that Chalabi, having lived in exile for so many years, may just have been out of touch with the real situation in Iraq.
There was no seduction; Iraq was the obvious next move in the War. And for an "out of touch" guy Chalabi has been remarkably sure-footed in Iraqi electoral politics...
But one suspects that Farid Ghadry may be no better informed about his homeland than was Chalabi.
Doesn't matter. The Freedom Train's rolling, and Ghadry may or may not climb aboard. The Greenways and the terrorists and tyrants will try to slow it down, but they will fail...(Thanks to Orrin for the link)

Posted by John Weidner at December 13, 2005 12:23 PM
Weblog by John Weidner