In the Agora: Where the Buck Stops

« Looking for that Special Someone? | Main | The Words We Choose »

December 26, 2004

Where the Buck Stops

Christopher Preble, director of foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute, has a new opinion piece at FOXNews.com exploring Rumsfeld's recent criticisms from the right. He notes that conservatives (some might call them paleocons) such as Robert Novak, William F. Buckley, Jr., George Will, and Tucker Carlson are "expressing grave concerns about a long-term U.S. commitment to reshape Iraqi society. They are skeptical of plans to remake the Greater Middle East."

This is nothing new really, but what is noteworthy, and has been discussed for the last couple weeks, is the criticism from so-called neoconservatives such as William Kristol, editor of the Weekly Standard. "Rather than admit that their theories are broken, neoconservatives have turned instead to criticizing the way Rumsfeld has gone about implementing their grand plans."

Say what you will about the initial decision to go to war in Iraq, but it seems that those now calling for Rumsfeld's neck are using him as a scapegoat and shield for criticisms of the underlying policy itself. Now reconsidering the tactics and strategy to reshape the Middle East through a new Iraq, many leading neoconservatives are calling for more troops, permanent bases, and a decades-long presence. In essence, they blame Rumsfeld for doing too little and doing it poorly. "Like a compulsive gambler desperate to recover his losses, neoconservative talking heads stare at the setbacks in Iraq and conclude not that theirs was a bad bet, but rather that more should be wagered."

Posted by Joshua Claybourn at December 26, 2004 08:53 AM

Comments

When the right and the left both dislike you, you're either really screwed up or are doing something really good. With Rummy, it's more like the latter.

Posted by: Mark Byron at December 26, 2004 04:15 PM | permalink

I can't speak for everyone, but a lot of the criticism I have read has nothing to do with any of the ideological points of neoconservatism or preventive war, but rather of Mr. Rumsfeld's several unfortunate tactical decisions which he has refused to evaluate with any rigor.

Posted by: Chuck at December 26, 2004 04:53 PM | permalink

For things to have gone as badly as they have in many ways someone had to screw up. How many people did we think it would take to maintain order in a country of 27,000,000 anyway? It seems that most of this war was based on a series of unwarranted assumptions and bad intel. Post-war planning? We don't need no stinking post-war planning.

Posted by: Jim S at December 28, 2004 09:12 PM | permalink