By the Rivers of Babylon
Not surprisingly, the news cycles over the last few days have been dominated by Iraq. With the impending Democratic takeover, the increasing willingness of Bush to admit the need for new thinking, and the James Baker situation, it is no shock that the war has again crept to the forefront of public debate.
My usual favorite news magazine, The New Republic has printed a special issue (Subscrip. Requir.) dedicated to the Iraq situation, soliciting such writers as Lawrence Kaplan, Robert Kagan, Richard Clarke and many others to offer their two cents. Unfortunately, it has also spawned truly insipid (albeit web-only) pieces, like Jonathan Chait’s suggestion to re-install Saddam Hussein to power, which was cross-published in the LA Times.
The Washington Post ran two pieces in today’s edition. The first deals with the Bush administration’s pressuring of PM al-Maliki, while the second reports on the growing tendency of American officials and lawmakers to level the blame squarely upon the Iraqis
Meanwhile, Friedman, Dowd and the Editorial Board have all dedicated today’s pieces to the conflict in the New York Times.
Certainly, there are some difficult choices in the days ahead for the United States. President Bush, currently at a NATO summit in Latvia, is scheduled for a sit down with al-Maliki in Jordan, on Wednesday. Meanwhile, everyone is worked up over the Iraq Study Group’s forthcoming solution. The war is finally coming to a head. Democrats are clamoring for a hasty withdrawal, John McCain is clamoring for more troops. Henry Kissinger recently gave a detailed and nuanced answer that basically broke down to ”Victory in Iraq is no longer possible, and that the “breakup of Iraq could be the eventual outcome. We are at a critical moment, indeed. Stay tuned, more to come indeed.
My usual favorite news magazine, The New Republic has printed a special issue (Subscrip. Requir.) dedicated to the Iraq situation, soliciting such writers as Lawrence Kaplan, Robert Kagan, Richard Clarke and many others to offer their two cents. Unfortunately, it has also spawned truly insipid (albeit web-only) pieces, like Jonathan Chait’s suggestion to re-install Saddam Hussein to power, which was cross-published in the LA Times.
The Washington Post ran two pieces in today’s edition. The first deals with the Bush administration’s pressuring of PM al-Maliki, while the second reports on the growing tendency of American officials and lawmakers to level the blame squarely upon the Iraqis
Meanwhile, Friedman, Dowd and the Editorial Board have all dedicated today’s pieces to the conflict in the New York Times.
Certainly, there are some difficult choices in the days ahead for the United States. President Bush, currently at a NATO summit in Latvia, is scheduled for a sit down with al-Maliki in Jordan, on Wednesday. Meanwhile, everyone is worked up over the Iraq Study Group’s forthcoming solution. The war is finally coming to a head. Democrats are clamoring for a hasty withdrawal, John McCain is clamoring for more troops. Henry Kissinger recently gave a detailed and nuanced answer that basically broke down to ”Victory in Iraq is no longer possible, and that the “breakup of Iraq could be the eventual outcome. We are at a critical moment, indeed. Stay tuned, more to come indeed.
