The Dartmouth Observer |
|
|
Commentary on politics, history, culture, and literature by two Dartmouth graduates and their buddies
WHO WE ARE Chien Wen Kung graduated from Dartmouth College in 2004 and majored in History and English. He is currently a civil servant in Singapore. Someday, he hopes to pursue a PhD in History. John Stevenson graduated from Dartmouth College in 2005 with a BA in Government and War and Peace Studies. He is currently a PhD candidate in the Department of Political Science at the University of Chicago. He hopes to pursue a career in teaching and research. Kwame A. Holmes did not graduate from Dartmouth. However, after graduating from Florida A+M University in 2003, he began a doctorate in history at the University of Illinois--Urbana Champaign. Having moved to Chicago to write a dissertation on Black-Gay-Urban life in Washington D.C., he attached himself to the leg of John Stevenson and is thrilled to sporadically blog on the Dartmouth Observer. Feel free to email him comments, criticisms, spelling/grammar suggestions. BLOGS/WEBSITES WE READ The American Scene Arts & Letters Daily Agenda Gap Stephen Bainbridge Jack Balkin Becker and Posner Belgravia Dispatch Black Prof The Corner Demosthenes Daniel Drezner Five Rupees Free Dartmouth Galley Slaves Instapundit Mickey Kaus The Little Green Blog Left2Right Joe Malchow Josh Marshall OxBlog Bradford Plumer Political Theory Daily Info Andrew Samwick Right Reason Andrew Seal Andrew Sullivan Supreme Court Blog Tapped Tech Central Station UChicago Law Faculty Blog Volokh Conspiracy Washington Monthly Winds of Change Matthew Yglesias ARCHIVES BOOKS WE'RE READING CW's Books John's Books STUFF Site Feed    |
Monday, September 16, 2002
Brent asked why do the pundits and "experts" who supported the attack on Kosovo oppose the war on Iraq? The reason is actually rather simple: as far as the pre-war planning for Iraq has gone they allege that it would be a US only attack (Blair doesn't seem to count) whereas the Kosovo War was a US-led attack. America is being lambasted for the same sin that Dr. Ron Edsforth mentioned in SSOC 1: Reganesque cowboy-diplomacy (the stuff that "war-crimes" are made of). Unfortunately, this has become an age of groupthink and groupact whereas the US was founded on going at it alone. Our founders gave the diplomatic finger to Britain and did what they thought was best. Last week some loopies were opining in the Washington Post and the NY Times about Kennedy compared to Bush. They suggested that former President Kennedy would have consulted with the UN and would not have dared to go in by himself. Clearly, these people either are talking about Robert Kenney, who never became president, or do not history. Bay of Pigs, anyone? Or maybe Profiles in Courage? (which probably should be retitled Profiles in Collaboration and Multilateralism to make appropriate for our history moment. Soon, however, Bush, having outsmarted the multilateralists, will invade Iraq through weapons inspectors over the objections of Kofi Annan, who has become a lot less important since Clinton left office. (I suggested as much last year on the World Affairs Council after Aly Rahim, the Chair, called me bloodthirsty for suggesting an attack on Iraq after Afghanistan.) On another note, the representative of the Arab League, an exclusive dictator's club, suggested that all hell would be unleashed if the US attacked Iraq. Either he is suggesting that the Arab League is in league with the Devil or that the Arab world is surrounded by the gates of hell to prevent the demons of the Middle East from roaming the erstwhile Free world. To borrow from the same imagery that suggest that the US was a "city on hill", I suggest that the gates of hell will not prevail againt US. |