Earlier this month, the always provocative Glenn Greenwald published a searing indictment of the ruling political class' shift towards declaring Iraq a "success" and the various disgusting positions which that entails. I've been rolling Glenn's article around and getting, quite frankly, madder and madder. His update is why:
Several people argue in Comments that this effort to portray the invasion of Iraq as a good thing is motivated not only by a desire for self-cleansing on the part of those responsible, but also to enable future, similar wars to take place. I don't know whether that's the motive, but it's definitely the effect.I mean, it's one thing to just try and cover your ass in some meaningless attempt to shine your shit into gold or whatever. But these are the real, terrible, consequences of the kind of PRAGMATIC SERIOUS attitudes that pervade the sickening elite of our country.
I used to say that I opposed the war but I at least wanted to "succeed" (whatever the fuck that means) now that we were in this horrible mess. But, you know what? Not any fucking more. Not as long as evil men like Friedman will be out there, pumping their fucking chests out with shrill screams for war and bloodshed and sending my friends off to die for no fucking reason other than the money and privilege of a few. The countries of Iraq and Afghanistan aren't going to be what we want to them to be, no matter how many brown children we mutilate and kill, so propping up some sort of false "victory" is what's going to dishonor the dead.
All this talk of making sure sacrifices aren't in vain is exactly fucking right. And you know the best way we can make sure that our fallen soldiers' lives weren't taken in vain? Learn from this goddamned debacle and make sure we don't do anything like this ever again. That wouldn't be a "waste" or "dishonorable" or whatever else the red meat assholes like Friedman petulantly scream at us while they gleefully send young men and women off to die.
If Friedman were just trying to cover his own evil, dishonest ass I wouldn't fucking care, but the kind of shit he's advocating is unspeakably horrific. He's saying we shouldn't care what the costs are, we can just table those for future generations! The point - the real point - is that Thomas Friedman needs constant war. Constant, never ending conflict to satiate his bloodlust. And you know what? It's not going to be enough. It will never be enough. As long as he can justify any conflict, any at all, by saying we shouldn't bother with the costs in blood and lives so long as we strangle some idiotic definition of "victory" out of the proceedings, we will be perpetually at war. Killing people because guys like Friedman salivate at the thought of the misery and pain of others.
And that's the real disgrace to the memory of the dead. If Friedman gets his way, that's when all those people will have died in vain.