The Fix Is In (And how to get out of it)

National Review Online ^ | March 28, 2003 | Jonah Goldberg

[WaterDragon]

The fix is in. "World opinion" — as defined by the United Nations, the AJWs (al-Jazeera-watchers), domestic antiwar types, the French and German streets, Hollywood, and certain segments of our own media — has decided that the United States and Great Britain will be held to an impossibly high standard during the duration of this war, while the peace-loving government of Saddam Hussein will be held to an outrageously low one. Kofi Annan has already made it clear he's more outraged by the possibility of an errant U.S. missile than he is by reports that Baath-party Brown Shirts are abducting the wives and children of Iraqi men and giving them a choice: Get mowed down by an Abrams or see your wife raped or son killed. He's more upset, again, by 15 innocent, but accidental, victims of war — who (bear with me: I need to explain this clearly, in case any U.N. diplomats are reading), if they died because of U.S. weaponry, were not the intended targets — than the numerous Iraqi civilians deliberately killed as human shields or as examples to others who'd dare rise up or refuse the call of the Baathist regime. There are reports this morning that perhaps thousands of Iraqi civilians have been shot at by Baathists inside Basra. This would not be a first there. Still, I will not hold my breath today for Annan to give a press conference denouncing Iraqi civilian casualties unless, that is, we make another tragic mistake.

But fine, fine. We can live by a higher standard. Indeed we must because, well, we are the good guys. And what makes the good guys good is being better than the bad guys. If that sounds too simplistic to you, all I can say is: shame on you.

Regardless, we should make it clear that while we are aware there are political and diplomatic benefits to behaving much, much, much better than that poor underdog Saddam Hussein, we are not conducting ourselves with honor in order to score a few benign adjectives from the Goebbels-like programmers of al-Jazeera, or perhaps to earn one less wag from Kofi Annan's finger. We are conducting ourselves with honor because our men and women are decent people fighting in a noble effort. Character, as some like to say, is what you do when no one is watching. And American character would remain as it is if all the 24-hour cameras were turned off tomorrow.

So, again, the fix is in. Jacques Chirac and Kofi Annan have already made it clear there's little the United States and Great Britain can do to make this war "legitimate," in the words of Chirac. They've moved the goalposts off the field and into the bleachers and, if need be, they'll put them on rollers. Maybe by this time next week we'll be able to see the goalposts in the Z section of the parking lot, making their way for the interstate. This week, when asked to state clearly who he wants to win this war, French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin offered what amounted to a verbal shrug, refusing to give an answer. After all, that is a complicated question. Side with the two democracies that twice saved and rebuilt your crippled nation and helped defend you from the Soviets or side with the barbaric tyranny which uses rapes the way the IRS uses audits. That is a toughie.

What's even tougher, though, is peeling through the incoherence of France's broader position. In his speech to the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London, Villepin also explained that during the current "war phase" when Americans and Brits are fighting and dying, "it is clear that the countries that have taken the lead on the ground may have a special responsibility." But during the "reconstruction phase," "The U.N. [Translation: France] must be at the heart of the reconstruction and administration of Iraq….The legitimacy of our action depends on it. We must come together to build peace together in a region rife with a sense of insecurity and deep fault lines."

Wait a second. "The countries that have taken the lead on the ground"? The countries that have taken the lead on the ground? "Our actions?" Did he really say these things?

Get Monsieur Villepin to his fainting couch for I believe he must have had some bad snails. What the hell is he talking about? It almost sounds like Mr. Villepin thinks he represents a country that has "taken the lead" in something other than being a proctological nuisance of cosmic proportions to "the countries that have taken the lead on the ground."....(snip)

Click HERE For Complete Article.

[sonofatpatcher2]

Well, if they want us to be the bad guys,

then let's be really bad!

[FairWitness]

And what makes the good guys good is being better than the bad guys. If that sounds too simplistic to you, all I can say is: shame on you.

There is no better or more profound theory of ethics than that of Mammy Yokum (Li'l Abner's mom)- "Good is better than evil because it is nicer."

[ErnBatavia]

..or revert to old WWII tactics:

[Kay Soze]

Iraqi leaders hope gruesome televised images of civilian and military casualties will cause an uproar that forces the Anglo-American coalition to back down, analysts said. -LA TIMES 3-28-03

[Egregious Philbin]

We can live by a higher standard. Indeed we must because, well, we are the good guys. And what makes the good guys good is being better than the bad guys. If that sounds too simplistic to you, all I can say is: shame on you.

Shame on me, I guess - that sounds ridiculously simplistic. Having to worry about every last civilian death in Iraq means American soliders could die for living by a higher standard.

[sonofatpatcher2]

We don't need no stinkin' tactics!
We got might on our side.