|
|
blog roll
|
mubarak, running a dirty election?...,
2005-09-08 15:48:07
| Main |
the international response...,
2005-09-09 10:11:52
the hitch:
I think, perhaps, that a miscreant by the name of iron lungfish nails it pretty well:
When was the last time Hitchens thought about the welfare of Iraqis? He applauded the carnage in Fallujah - twice. He shrugs off the coming theocracy and has mostly ignored the future of Iraqi women under sharia. He was waving aside Chalabi’s corruption and treachery for months by basically saying “Ahmad pinky-swore it wasn’t so” until he stopped mentioning him entirely.
The one constant in all of Hitchens’s pieces on Iraq is neither Iraqis nor the Bush administration: it’s Hitchens. His articles read as a prolonged and desperate exercise in ass-covering, serving less to excuse the war than to excuse Hitchens’s continued defense of it. His primary targets are never Zarqawi or the insurgents or even Saddam, but the anti-war movement; he doesn’t tell us that we’re really winning the war (as so many warbloggers do) so much as he insists again and again that there was plenty of reason to launch it. Each Hitchens piece on Iraq should not be viewed as an argument regarding Iraq per se, but an argument regarding Hitchens’s own credibility as a commentator; each should be properly titled “Why I Am, Despite All Evidence To The Contrary, Still Right.”
:: posted by buermann @ 2005-09-08 17:05:48 CST |
link
|
|
|
|
