<<Back to Introduction.
I've said it before: I lack the enviable certainty of many of my liberal contemporaries.
I stand by in wonderment that they can be so sure they're right. The issues are so complicated, sos dependent on conditions that I for one can't guess at and am loth to imagine. I feel the same about them as I do about Bush.
Should we withdraw all troops from Iraq? Should we surge forward? How do they know? What's the evidence, for or against? By which I mean evidence. More and more, the evidence for my opinions consists of the opinions of other people I've decided to put my faith in. And more and more, that feels perilous to me.
Of course, I feel from time to time as if I know too, but in all honesty, it's more that I feel that I "know." At some level, I know that I don't. Other people aren't hindered by any such doubts.
The President and General Petraeus think they know what to do about Iraq, as do Nancy Pelosi, Jim Webb, and other people from my side of the fence. And this is one thing I know: all of them know more about it than I do, at least as regards logistics, risk/benefit studies, and so on.
And this is another thing I know: half the problem with the discussion is that no one ever finishes their sentences.
Now James Baker---Mr. "Grave and Deteriorating"----is weighing in on the President's, and General Petraeus's side.
[quote begins from Salon, "Still Grave and Deteriorating," by Walter Shapiro]
The president's plan ought to be given a chance," Baker told the Senate
Foreign Relations Committee. "The general [David Petraeus] you
confirmed 81-0 just the day before yesterday, this is his idea. He's a
supporter of it. He's now the commander on the ground in Iraq. Give it
a chance." Baker repeated his refrain so often that it sounded like he
was channeling some perverse version of a John Lennon tune: "Give
Escalation a Chance."
[quote ends]
The trouble I have with the request to "give it a chance" is that it's an incomplete sentence. A chance to do what, exactly? A chance to win? Win what for whom? What measurable, identifiable goal or prize should we expect? How will we know when we get there?
I'm disconcerted that this is Baker, previously of the Iraq Study Group, telling me this. Not that I believed he was objective, but I'd given him credit for a certain level of detachment.
What's missing at this point is information from reliable sources. Everything is getting filtered through politics, including an article such as Shapiro's. As I trust Salon and have determined over the years that their views and mine are generally parallel, I am inclined to allow my opinions to be guided by them.
But the stakes at present are too high for me to rely even on Salon. I want objective data to the extent any can be had.