Starting with his own lovely daughters?

Oh, don’t you love all those chickenhawks who just love to extol the military lifestyle– but not for their own offspring?
Latest one to join the club is Tom Friedman, writing this in today’s New York Times:

    Maybe it is too late, but before we give up on Iraq, why not actually try to do it right? Double the American boots on the ground and redouble the diplomatic effort…

What a sorry ignoramus, for crying out loud!
Where on earth does he think the US military is going to find the additional 140,000-plus-plus troops it would take to achieve this? The army can’t even plan on sustaining the present level of deployment for more than the next couple of months.
Has he even heard about the recruitment crisis?
Maybe he’ll set the ball rolling to remedy that by frogmarching his own two lovely daughters down to the nearest recruiting office. (There’s another wellknown chickenhawk who could follow that example, too.)
H’mm. Come to think of it, they’ve extended the upper age-limit for active service to the extent that Tom himself could also sign up. Three members of the Friedman family– great!
Now, about the next 139,997 new recruits…
Actually, I’m kinda disappointed. I have disagreed with just about everything my old bud’ Tom has written on Iraq in the past four years. But usually he at least makes logical, well-informed arguments.
But this one?

42 thoughts on “Starting with his own lovely daughters?”

  2. Re: Friedman’s column
    Helena your comments are right on mark. Where are we
    going to get additional troops? Rumsfeld did it on the cheap because the American people wouldn’t have stood for 300-400k troops initially.
    To do this we’ll need a draft, voters & politicians
    won’t stand for it. Public support has been lost. The Bush admin. has no credibility(or political capital).

  3. Tom Friedman may have subconsciously assumed that US recruits could be trained faster than Iraqis. I see little reason for this to be so.

  4. Tom Friedman is an obnoxious, self-important, puffed up blowhard who knows nothing and understands less.

  5. I find it is funny everytime someone used the term “chicken-hawk” as an argument in itself. I served in Iraq and probably will go back there again. Let say years from now, I become and elected official or a politically appointed offical. I then advocate for an invasion of Canada – using vague reasoning. I guess because I served, my position will be more valid than other people who did not serve.

  6. Hey Tony….you call posting one stinking comment “heckling”? Nah….you’re not thin skinned.
    Yeah, Tom, the only man in Washington that cares about what is going on in Iraq enough to talk about it? Its sad…he’s losing his mind.

  7. i read this editorial a while ago … and I took this “double the troops” call as completely empty of any reality
    to me, Friedman is simply a guy who is utterly out of ideas
    … but he still has to write his editorials … so here we are.

  9. The only way Friedman’s oped makes any sense is if you interpret it as advocating a return to the draft. If you look at it that way, it is clear what he thinks we “need to talk about” but haven’t wanted to, and what he thinks our kids (not his, I’m sure) ought to be doing instead of “go[ing] shopping.” I hope someone calls him on this.

  10. Agree with John C.
    Hasn’t Friedman’s thing been that liberals should be happy with Bush over Iraq, and should support Bush? So yeah soon he will say that liberals shoudl be signing up for the war, or Bush should call for a draft and liberals shoudl just sit by and let that happen, or should support Bush in his call.
    I think that the Iraq war has an awful lot of liberalism in it, and it would be revealing for liberals to examine that, in a quiet private place.

  11. Instead of the draft it may be time to tap the Shirins of America. They live here, they seem to know best what is needed, they speak the language and know the culture. I’d love to see the Shirins over there, and maybe the Helenas will have the guts to visit instead of the remote journalism from the beltway.
    David

  14. Someone should also draft the chickenhawk who wrote this in April, 2003, and his kids:
    “I hold on to the belief that the Baath regime in Iraq has been virtually genocidal (no one talks about the fate of the Marsh Arabs) and that having it removed cannot in the end be a bad thing. That’s what I tell anxious parents of our troops over there; it is a noble enterprise to remove the Baath, even if so many other justifications for the war are crumbling.”
    Juan Cole, of course. Draft him and his kids. Demand an apology, and his resignation. It’s only fair.

  15. Whatever Friedman writes, his conclusions are almost always complete nonsense (if one considers hyper-simplistic right-wing political views nonsense, that is). Because his arguments sometimes seem to be, well, rational (if you don’t dig too deep, that is), he has the reputation of a thinker, even a liberal one. But as a description of his real stature as a thinker a word like “nincompoop” would be more realistic.

  16. Maybe the extra troops won’t be needed:
    There is a new agreement on the Iraqi Constitutional Convention, and a big chunk of the Sunni leadership has agreed to join up.
    Also, an anti-insurgency TV show is fascinating virtually the entire nation of Iraq. It shows jihadists and insurgents confessing to their crimes in Iraqi custody. Sometimes it switches back an forth from the video of a beheading to the confession of the captured beheader. Grisly “Reality TV” from a country in the middle of a civil war.

  17. That “anti-insurgency” TV show is very old news, Warrne W. You mean you just found out about it? The show has also been pretty thoroughly discredited. For starters it runs on the Al Iraqiya network, which was created, funded, staffed, and runs by the pleasure of the occupation. But that alone is not enough to discredit it, and there is plenty else that proves it is pure propaganda.

  18. Heh… I got directed here from Faiza’s site… I see now that she finally “understands” what’s going on in Iraq, and the truth apparrently is exactly what she thought it was before! Strange how that works! And now she has also learned that America is responsible for atrocities committed all across Africa and Asia, and not just the Middle East! America truly is the great satan she always thought it was! Good thing she went to America to learn the facts!
    *sigh*
    Now, on to your post, Helena. How many troops do we have on active duty? How many in the reserves?
    I’m pretty sure it’s more than 280,000 🙂
    The 1st MEF is not in Iraq now. That’s 45,000 right there. Can we find 85,000 from the Army to make up the rest? I think we can.
    That’s not something I think we should do, btw. I’m just pointing out something that should be obvious. If we wanted 280,000 troops in Iraq, there’d be 280,000 troops in Iraq. We had 1.2 million US troops in Kuwait for desert storm, you know.
    First and last post on your blog. I hope it was courteous enough.

  19. Stick around Craig, we can use your pragmatism to stay afloat in this sea of prejudice.
    Thanks Dominic, I am starting to like your style.
    Peter Pan, I have plenty of ideas, I am just not calling the shots, so my ideas never get implemented.
    David

  20. I guess we can’t talk to Craig, since that was his “first and last post” here. So David, what did you think was “pragmatic” about Craig’s post?

  21. David,
    I am contacting the recruitment office tomorrow so they can give you a call! I know you want to support these policies of Bush, and they need your help! They are not meeting the military recruitment goals, so now is the time to sign up or shut up!
    Anyone who does not support Bush’s policies is exempt. Anyone who protested before or since the war is also exempt. That includes Shirin.
    “Also, an anti-insurgency TV show is fascinating virtually the entire nation of Iraq. It shows jihadists and insurgents confessing to their crimes in Iraqi custody.” -WarrenW.
    So, WarrenW, do you think confessions extracted under torture are reliable? Even with no evidance? Of course, we had no evidance of the WMDs being in Iraq, and look how well that turned out.
    I couldn’t figure out why everyone believed those WMD lies.
    And I’m still wondering why those “Lackawanda suicide bombers” pleaded guilty to avoid the death penalty? Why not keep their mouths shut and take their chances with the US court system? Do they want to serve jail time so they can live to bomb in a decade or two or three?
    I can’t figure it out.
    personnally, I don’t think torture gets good info. If someone started torturing me, I would say anything. I have a secret coded way of saying it and dozens of family members who know the code and would figure it out in a second.
    By the way, some of those TV terrorists confessed to killing people who are very much still alive…. funny how that works, no?
    I can’t figure it out. Why do people believe out and out lies?

  22. Heh… I got directed here from Faiza’s site… I see now that she finally “understands” what’s going on in Iraq, and the truth apparrently is exactly what she thought it was before! -Craig
    Same is true for me. The lack of WMDs found means that there were no WMDs there. When Bush said on the night of the invasion that Iraqis should not set fire to oil wells, that said it all.
    The truth is what I suspected all along, and now we have the evidance to support the truth.
    How come people still believe the lies after all this time? How many people are going to die for Bush’s chance to try and get his hands on the oil wells? (which will not happen by the way).

  24. Craig,
    Your arguments are weak and far from pragmatic. First, you don’t take in account the need for a rotation. Second the fact that the US could put 1.2 mio troops in the first gulfwar doesn’t proove that they can do the same right now. Third, do they have the right personal for the kind of urban warfare and guerilla going on in Iraq ? From what I’ve heard they don’t..

  25. It is now proven that the US used Mk77 incendiary napalm like bombs in Iraq. They lied to the UK about it (at least that’s what the UK minister pretends). The US has admitted using it at the time of invasion, against military targets. But the kind of damage consistently reported from Falludja (and the fact that US blocked any entrance in the city for weeks and even months after the assault, even to redcross personal) makes it highly probable that it was used in Falludja against civilian targets as well. More in this report of the Independant
    Is that also OK for Mr Friedman ? should the US military double that kind of war crimes too ?
    BTW, Helena, great post on Mr Friedman I appreciated it.

  26. Christiane
    “Many folks (out of habit) refer to the Mark 77 as ‘napalm’ because its effect upon the target is remarkably similar.”
    Col. Michael Daily
    http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/military/20030805-9999_1n5bomb.html
    “MOAB, the Mother of All Bombs or more formally the Massive Ordnance Air Blast
    this is designed to shock and awe the Iraqis,” says Chris Bolkcom, a military analyst with the Congressional Research Service.”
    http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-03-11-us-bomb-test_x.htm

  27. Peter Pan, I’ve read Cole’s tortuous explanation of his ultra-nuanced complex position (w/hints of cherry and walnuts), and none of it holds water.
    Any human being with a conscience was concerned with the legality of the invasion, the absence of UN support, with the likely civilian deaths. Not many stepped up to publicly announce that it would be “worth the sacrifices…about to be made on all sides” as Cole did on the eve of the war. Not many told anxious parents that their children were involved in a “noble enterprise.”
    Cole: World order is not served by unilateral military action, to which I do object. But world order, human rights and international law are likewise not served by allowing a genocidal monster to remain in power.
    Cole needs to resign his tenured position, and issue an apology immediately, just as Helena recommends for all the various other chickenhawks with identical views.

  28. Jaime,
    Cole can be quite ambiguous and his positions have fluctuated over the time, but this isn’t always bad, only stubborn and only dumb people never change their advice. I’m often upset by the way he describes the resistance as remnants of the former regime and Baathists, but don’t call for his resignation.. the Bushies could get him replaced with someone more friendly to the actual US ME policy.

  29. Oh, really ?
    So, this business about controlling everybody all around the world just sounds to me like pie in the sky, and the same sort of thinking that got us mired in the jungles of Vietnam.
    I will be ecstatic to see Saddam go. But I have a bad feeling about this, as Han Solo once said prophetically.
    posted by Juan @ 2/27/2003 08:28:45 AM

  30. Peter Pan, I’m quite familiar with Mr. Cole’s ineffectual butt-covering/about-face. His “bad feeling” concerned an altogether separate issue (“controlling everybody in the world,” and ” “serial wars with Iraq, Iran, Syria, N. Korea, and apparently ultimately China”), not the binary decision to support the war or not, a question he answered affirmatively on the eve of the US invasion. I’m pretty sure Friedman & Hoagland would share Juan’s “bad feeling” about controlling everybody in the world and serial wars with 4 extra nations.
    Yet Cole backed the Iraq war, claiming it would be “worth the sacrifices that are about to be made on all sides.” He therefore should resign immediately both from his chair at U. Mich and MESA, and issue an apology to the people of Iraq and the families of our dead and injured servicemen. I very much look forward to Helena’s post addressing this topic with her trademark flair.

  31. Jaime
    “issue an apology to the people of Iraq and the families of our dead and injured servicemen”
    Just him?
    How many others did like him, they may be did more?
    what they can do?

  32. The question is did Juan Cole or Tom Friedman learn anything. I think Juan has come to understand a little more about the limits of liberalism.
    I never really understood anyway, how a liberal could say that Saddam was a genocider but we couldn’t invade. We are signed up to a genocide convention. (I don’t want to argue this over again though, I think the genocide charges were exaggerated 10x-100x).
    But at least Juan is more intimately involved in what everybody has to say in Iraq, and can’t really tune out the conservative religious people who have most of the guns over there. TF spends most of his time on a loftier plane.

  33. Susan,
    Bring them on…
    I also want clean streets, safe housing, education, and good health for my co-citizens. Do I also have to sign up for the municipality, the fire department, the university, and be a nurse?
    BTW, our marines have plenty of people that left their careers after 9/11 when they concluded that we might be indeed on a collision course with radical Islam. One of them just got acquited of some phony charges for his actions in the battlefield.
    David

  34. “THE Iraqi “criminal gang” that held Douglas Wood hostage demanded a $US25million”
    Good news for his family and to Auzi.
    I think US forces should track these killers, it went beyond the believes these killers must be punched without any mercy, these criminal gangs start there dirty criminal with Iraqis they kidnapped students, some time even they got what they asked for and they kill the hostages, this sort of guys they enjoying the killing, I think now its time to stop them after along time the Iraqi families loudly asking for security be restored but there were no real responses from US troops or Iraqi as many Iraqi families reach to point they negotiated directly with the kidnapers fto free there loved ones.

  36. For sure, there must be fifty ways to genocide your brother: some gaz, some bomb, some burn, some boil, some napalm… [ Put your country’s favourite here]

  37. Wellbasically wrote :
    “I never really understood anyway, how a liberal could say that Saddam was a genocider but we couldn’t invade.”
    Oh.. it’s simple, there are international humanitarian laws. They allow a war declaration only if a country represents an immediate threat. That was not the case with Saddam. He was a threat about ten years ago, but nomore so when the US invaded Iraq.
    What about the past crimes will you say ? well, for that there is the International Criminal Court. But US doesn’t seem to want it.
    There is also “Real Politik” and the reality has turned out like many antiwar predicted : the “cure” has caused more harm in two years than Saddam’s regime did.

  38. Christiane, to what “international humanitarian laws” are you referring here, specifically, that permit a declaration of war in the condition of imminent threat? A specific citation would be helpful, thanks.
    Also, what imminent threat was posed by Serbia during the conflicts in the Balkans?

  39. >>>>What about the past crimes will you say ? well, for that there is the International Criminal Court.
    — OK but I don’t think such a court was necessary when the US signed up to the convention against genocide. In any case the biggest (surviving) justification of the war is the genocide case.
    >>>>the “cure” has caused more harm in two years than Saddam’s regime did
    — I agree with this. There’s plenty of evidence that the bombing of Fallujah killed many more people than the bombing of Halabja.
    >>>>what imminent threat was posed by Serbia during the conflicts in the Balkans
    — If you remember, the stories were that the Serbs had killed 100,000 Kosovo Albanians. I think the actual charge was reduced to less than 1,000 — after the NATO bombing started. If you look at the charges against Saddam, they have been reduced from the initial numbers by a similar ratio.
    Lots of big numbers get thrown around, including what the US has done to Iraqis, that are probably exaggerated. As long as these numbers are triggers to action for the liberal side, there has to be a better effort to verify them. Otherwise the war people will gin them up to make you jump.
    Incidentally, I’d say Tom Friedman is much more into the US doing this (Iraq) as an example to lead the world, a PR exercise, much closer to Wolfowitz than he might seem. I doubt he would deny it if you asked him.

  40. Well, David, I’m all in favor of you having “other priorities” and exercizing the Cheney Option in not enlisting. The good news since February is that more and more young Americans are also exercizing the Cheney Option and are starving the oil company and AIPAC war machine of its necessary fuel. That might spare Syrian and Iranian children from 900 lb. bombs and M77 air burst weapons. What you should do instead is take a political role in the Baghdad Green Zone. You should think of positive things to say about Talabani’s and Jaafari’s and Hakeem’s preferred friends: The Islamic Republic of Iran.

  41. Multisect,
    I know I would be useful, but I can’t be everywhere. Incidentally it does not take more Americans, the Iraqis are showing how they can kill each other over who knows what intestine arguments within their own Islamic sects. Eventually exhaustion will make them more receptive to rebuilding and help.
    I am immensely thankful to our soldiers for their effort in such a complex and thankless mission.
    David

  42. Well said, Sahib. As Guantanamo is closer than Iraq, maybe you should look for an oportunity there to tear and congratulate.

Comments are closed.