Hard to dispute (when I've said it before)

OP-ED: Iraq's Inevitabilities, By Richard Cohen, Washington Post, September 25, 2007; Page A19

Analysis that's rather hard to dispute. Again, a Balkans done backwards.

(Thanks: Hans Suter, who says 'seems ghostwritten by you')

Comments

[jerseyrefugee]

Yes an intriguing analysis, but Mr. Cohen strains his argument ("...volcanic eruption of nationalism and sectarianism that drenched the 20th century in blood... has not yet run its course") before he even gets to it. The "centuries old nationalism" argument just doesn't hold water - note Cohen's citation of high intermarriage rates in Bosnia before the war. Same applied to Rwanda. In both cases (and all similar crises), you will always find an extremist political faction (former communist Milosevic as resurrected fascist; extremist Hutus clandestinely organizing just after their ouster) mobilizing for their own ends at the expense of the community. Neutralize, defeat the extremist faction and you address the problem. Innocent and allied Iraqis are dying in greater numbers so why are we so frustrated?

[Dan Hare]

With the billions spent and wasted in Iraq, one would think that better prep and contigencies would allow for building planned communities on empty dirt with the best civil planners the world has to offer. SYS ADMIN at its best.

To de-centralize from Baghdad just makes good sense to me.

[Anonymous]

we are so frustrated because so many need not have died - Iraqis and Americans.