| Submit your comments on this article |
| Britain |
| Poor George: Takes a Trimmin from Hitchens, Now |
| 2005-05-22 |
| Typically wordy Hitchens treatise, but he does scorch Galloway well A taste: Let me phrase this another way: Those who had alleged that a million civilians were dying from sanctions were willing, nay eager, to keep those same murderous sanctions if it meant preserving Saddam! This is repellent enough in itself. If the Saddam regime was cheating its terrified people of food and medicine in order to finance its own propaganda, that would perhaps be in character. But if it were to be discovered that any third parties had profited from the persistence of "sanctions plus regime," prolonging the agony and misery thanks to personal connections, then one would have to become quite judgmental. The bad faith of a majority of the left is instanced by four things (apart, that is, from mass demonstrations in favor of prolonging the life of a fascist government). First, the antiwar forces never asked the Iraqi left what it wanted, because they would have heard very clearly that their comrades wanted the overthrow of Saddam. (President Jalal Talabani's party, for example, is a member in good standing of the Socialist International.) This is a betrayal of what used to be called internationalism. Second, the left decided to scab and blackleg on the Kurds, whose struggle is the oldest cause of the left in the Middle East. Third, many leftists and liberals stressed the cost of the Iraq intervention as against the cost of domestic expenditure, when if they had been looking for zero-sum comparisons they might have been expected to cite waste in certain military programs, or perhaps the cost of the "war on drugs." This, then, was mere cynicism. Fourth, and as mentioned, their humanitarian talk about the sanctions turned out to be the most inexpensive hypocrisy. |
| Posted by:badanov |
| #5 Okay, well, perhaps he's like Zell Miller, then: He didn't move to the right, the others just moved far to the Left to live in Looney Land. So there's like, what, 10, 12 Liberals who aren't insane zoomie Moonbats? ;-) |
| Posted by: .com 2005-05-22 21:18 |
| #4 Well, I guess thats the Gallows Way of totalitarians. |
| Posted by: an dalusian dog 2005-05-22 21:10 |
| #3 Hitchens is still very much a creature of the left. |
| Posted by: badanov 2005-05-22 19:24 |
| #2 Hitchens claims to be an honest leftist, not like the scum-sucking hypocrites he castigates in this and other articles. He isn't bothered by those who say he turned to the right post-9/11, because he denies their right to judge him. Sorry, .com. There are a few honest leftists. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2005-05-22 18:51 |
| #1 Good post, bad! Um, didn't "they" pull Hitchens' Liberal card? I'm pretty sure he's been demoted to the B or C List, by now. I mean surely all this kick-ass fisking of the LLL icons has taken a toll on his "I'm an insane Moonbat, and damned proud of it!" credentials. He sounds like he's definitely over the hump, to me. Keep it up, Chris - we'll take ya. |
| Posted by: .com 2005-05-22 17:29 |