On today's NYT op-ed page, it's Friedman vs MoDo.
First, Dowd:
Speaking to reporters this week, Mr. Bush made the bizarre argument that the worse things get in Iraq, the better news it is. "The more successful we are on the ground, the more these killers will react," he said.
In the Panglossian Potomac, calamities happen for the best. One could almost hear the doubletalk echo of that American officer in Vietnam who said: "It was necessary to destroy the village in order to save it."
Now, Friedman:
There is this notion being peddled by Europeans, the Arab press and the antiwar left that "Iraq" is just Arabic for Vietnam, and we should expect these kinds of attacks from Iraqis wanting to "liberate" their country from "U.S. occupation." These attackers are the Iraqi Vietcong.
Hogwash. The people who mounted the attacks on the Red Cross are not the Iraqi Vietcong. They are the Iraqi Khmer Rouge — a murderous band of Saddam loyalists and Al Qaeda nihilists, who are not killing us so Iraqis can rule themselves. They are killing us so they can rule Iraqis.
Have you noticed that these bombers never say what their political agenda is or whom they represent? They don't want Iraqis to know who they really are. A vast majority of Iraqis would reject them, because these bombers either want to restore Baathism or install bin Ladenism.
It's Friedman by a knockout in the second round.
Friedman in the first round!
Second round? Pshaw. Dowd never even managed to get up off her stool.
I heard an ICRC spokesman interviewed on the NewsHour last night. He very clearly named the combatants as 'the occupiers' vs. 'the Iraqis'. Completely clueless.
P. J. O'Rourke wrote that it is the beauty of a well-designed fascism that it gives every pissant an anthill to piss from. In Iraq our opponents are the pissants of Saddam's fascism. Liberation threw them off the gravy train and they are killing to get back on it.
We are also opposed by the jihadis who want to destroy America and subjugate all the infidels, and agents of the surrounding tyrannies, Syria, Iran and the Wahhabist Entity. There is overlap between these catagories, of course. If we succeed in Iraq the tyrants and the Islamofascists are doomed, and they know it.
Khmer Rouge?
What a wonderful comparison.
Next people will be calling Saddam and/or Osama "nice old men".
Two million more reasons we can't fail in Iraq.