Iraq Update: Al-Qaeda Delivers the Bloodiest Day of the Year
show comments
  • Nathan

    This sort of thing somewhat reveals the lie that Iraqi insurgents just wanted the USA out of Iraq, doesn’t it?

  • Kris

    [Let’s find out if the distinguished looking lady at the head of the table allows black humor.]

    “Iraq Update: Al-Qaeda Delivers the Bloodiest Day of the Year”

    But on a happier note, that day also saw the Iraqi premiere of “The Dark Knight Rises”.

  • thibaud

    Funny you should bring that up, Kris. Nary a peep from our host on this subject.

    Which at first glance seems really odd.

    Because when there’s a mass public shooting in France, your “lady at the head of the table” is all over it, and quick to draw conclusions about European character:

    http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2012/04/30/europes-jew-hatred-isnt-just-on-the-fringe/

    When there’s a massacre in Norway, VM is quick out of the blocks, making points about Norwegian “nastiness” and reflecting at length about modern society:

    http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2011/07/25/from-norway-to-hell/

    When there’s (yet another) massacre here in the USA on the turf of what VM calls the “home team,” the response is …. silence.

    Adam Gopnik of the New Yorker puts Via Meadia to shame:

    “The truth is made worse by the reality that no one—really no one—anywhere on the political spectrum has the courage to speak out about the madness of unleashed guns and what they do to American life.”

    http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2012/07/aurora-movie-shooting-one-more-massacre.html#ixzz21VABPVO4

  • I don’t know if the comments are getting briefer. But from where I stand on this subject they’re definitely getting better (along with the humor, if I may add).

    Meanwhile I can’t help thinking: In a no-hypocrisy, what-you-see-is-what-you-get world, the anti-nation-building lobby on “our” side would find an embarrassing number of areas of common ground with the al-Qaeda freedom-fighters (pun intended). I mean, anything to keep a fledgling, probationary or even makeshift nation-state from functioning, right? Besides, what makes us think these Arabs have even the CAPACITY for nationhood? So instead we should settle for chronic or worse instability on an intimate, Beirut-type, block-by-block scale, in which those who suffer worst are by far the most vulnerable – women, children, the poor and uneducated, the elderly, the “immobile.” Then again – and I realize I risk sounding both cynical and hysterical in suggesting this – what exactly are THEIR lives worth to a global corporatocracy?

    Funny thing too about al-Qaeda options for maintaining or enhancing credibility. You really don’t ever have to be POPULAR with the majority of your base population; all you have to do is TERRIFY enough of them on the one hand, while keeping yourself in a state of semi-reputability on the other, by means of a carefully cultivated guilt factor and its various ripple effects through the community (“I’M a wholehearted Muslim: are YOU?”). Imagine you’re a devout believer, and slowly, incrementally, actions you’ve always instinctively loathed and detested start becoming the standard by which you – or others close to you – now measure your fervor and dedication. And so what was once unthinkable becomes quasi-(or unofficially) obligatory.

    Hateful and fanatical ideas can paralyse populations even when they don’t convince them. Which returns me to an old question and concern of mine: When are we going to start seriously combating the IDEOLOGY of al-Qaeda and its franchises and imitators, and not just its various organizations and actions? Or are we going to continue to refrain from condemning Nazism outright, so to speak, for fear of offending Germans?

  • dearieme

    The war of occupation in Iraq has been a failure. Is anyone surprised?

    The war of conquest was a success but, as far as I can see, a pointless one.

    In total, the whole thing was an appallingly ill-judged political adventure undertaken at stupendous cost of blood and treasure.

  • Kris

    [email protected]: So now you’re reduced to complaining that this blog doesn’t cover the stories you want it to cover? To quote someone, “It’s so unfair”.

  • thibaud

    No complaints here, Kris. Just curious as to why the silence, ‘s all. Very strange, don’t you think?

  • Kris

    [email protected]: “Very strange, don’t you think?”

    Honestly, not really. If I thought guns in the US were a Serious Issue That Must Be Dealt With, I’d be more interested in the story. I don’t, so I’m not. Just another of the many tragic stories in the world. Similarly, quite a few commenters felt that our host was making too much of the counter-examples you brought up, and many others besides. We all have our interests, bugbears, narratives. Even our host. So?

  • thibaud

    Faire un oeuf. I suppose I keep hoping against hope that enlightened conservatives like our host will actually help move the national debate forward, with fact-based, good-faith, sophisticated analysis rather than sneers against OtherSide and partisan cheerleading.

  • Fred

    Thibaud, I never agree with you, but your comments are usually at least well-argued, if often nasty and condescending. But your comment at number 3 is sheer idiocy. The Aurora shooter is a lone lunatic, the kind of psychotic that could exist in any culture at any time. Al Qaeda is an organized and sane, if evil, group of people. While their sort of brutality and bloodthirstiness are not limited to the Middle East, that region is certainly the locus for much, if not most, of it. AQ is therefore, even though a minority, much more representative of Middle Eastern culture (excepting Israel) than a lone psycho is of American culture. In your rush to insult Professor Mead, this time you’ve made a bloody fool of yourself.

  • thibaud

    Fred – I agree 100% with your points about Homes and AQ.

    Where we disagree is whether it’s an “insult,” as you put it, to point out the discrepancy between our host’s eager, and rather unseemly, diatribes against Norwegian or French or Euro-wide moral turpitude and his total silence when occasioned by the exact same incident, a mass public shooting, when it occurs on home turf.

    Any fair assessment of this discrepancy would suggest that there’s some bad faith at work. It’s as if, say, a Catholic who had been constantly ranting against muslim honor killings had nothing whatsoever to say – not even a perfunctory condemnation a la Ratzinger’s occasional remarks – about the Church’s practice of protecting pedophile priests.

  • Kris

    Back in the day, I was struck by the fact that our host had nothing to say about the Winnenden massacre in Germany. This is obviously a sign that he is trying to whitewash German crimes. Or it just might be that he isn’t interested in being an “It bleeds, it leads” blog, and only covers stories which he considers of significance. If, for example, the Colorado shootings were committed by a Christian in a mosque, do you really doubt that this blog would cover it extensively?

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2017 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.