Why Bush Will Be A Winner
By William Kristol
Sunday, July 15, 2007; Page B01
(main points)
First, no second terrorist attack on U.S. soil -- not something we could have taken for granted. Second, a strong economy -- also something that wasn't inevitable. And third, and most important, a war in Iraq that has been very difficult, but where -- despite some confusion engendered by an almost meaningless "benchmark" report last week -- we now seem to be on course to a successful outcome.
As I type this, there are 261 pages of reader commentary on the piece and most are negative. I mentioned his stupid comment about how the Shia and Sunni will get along just fine and others have also pointed out Kristol's lack of credibility, including David Corn in the following Tuesday edtion of the WaPo:
...let's review Kristol's record as a prognosticator.
On Sept. 18, 2002, he declared that a war in Iraq "could have terrifically good effects throughout the Middle East." A day later, he said Saddam Hussein was "past the finish line" in developing nuclear weapons. On Feb. 20, 2003, he said of Saddam: "He's got weapons of mass destruction.... Look, if we free the people of Iraq we will be respected in the Arab world." On March 1, 2003 -- 18 days before the invasion of Iraq -- Kristol dismissed the possibility of sectarian conflict afterward. He also said, "Very few wars in American history were prepared better or more thoroughly than this one by this president." He maintained that the war would cost $100 billion to
$200 billion. (The running tab is now about half a trillion dollars.) On March 5, 2003, Kristol said, "We'll be vindicated when we discover the weapons of mass destruction."
On July 5, Kristol had a similarly psychotic piece in TIME magazine and ThinkProgress does a nice job showing us the delusions Kristol is suffering from:
Claim #1: There have been “very limited terrorist successes in Europe or even in the Middle East.” Between 2005 and 2006, international terrorist attacks increased 29 percent, reported U.S. intelligence. Forty-five percent of the attacks took place in Iraq. Between 2004 and 2005, international terrorist attacks tripled to nearly 10,000, in part due to the war in Iraq.
Claim #2: “We’ve had 5 1/2 years of robust economic growth.” Today, the top one percent of earners have a greater share of national income than at any time since 1920. Wage growth has slowed to a crawl, and “overall pace of job creation, which has slowed compared to prior years, is barely enough to keep pace with population growth.”
Claim #3: “The balance sheet is uncertain” in Iraq. Since January, violence “has
increased in most provinces” and U.S. and Iraqi forces “have been unable to
diminish rising sectarian violence contributing to the volatile security situation,” says a recent Pentagon report.
The question I have is
"How can someone who has been so wrong about so many important things so often get published in a leading American newspaper and a leading American news magazine?"
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment