Saturday, August 14, 2004


Ledeen’s Iraq

For those who weren't sufficiently "intrigued" by my last post quoting Mr. Michael Ledeen (the present neocon program architect) to read his writings, I offer some illustrations from an article by Mr. Ledeen, "Panic as Policy?" published on Thursday, April 29, 2004 at National Review Online that relates to Iraq. I recommend reading the full article so that you can see the quotes below in their true context. It is more frighteningly revealing. An example:

"Like many others, I would have preferred our armed forces to pursue the murderers of the four security men, and to arrest or destroy them and their henchmen in Fallujah… "

After the death of more than 700 people including some 200 women and children (not to mention the injured) to avenge the ugly murder of four security men by a few villains through 21 days of bombing and mass punishment… the man wants more blood!

This is ugly! However, the article does contain a few amusing gems that demonstrate his "esteem" for democracy.


"We should have prepared the political battleground before the fighting ever started, by creating a democratic Iraqi government-in-exile…"

Creating a democratic Iraqi government-in-exile? I would like to know how one could do that!

"But internal divisions within the Bush administration proved intractable, and future historians will no doubt marvel at the fact that more passion and more man hours were spent fighting Ahmed Chalabi and the Iraqi National Congress than combating the likes of Moqtada and the remnants of Saddam's security forces. Indeed, the internal battle consumed countless hours in recent weeks, as is demonstrated by the cascade of anti-Chalabi leaks from his many mortal enemies at the Department of State and the Central Intelligence Agency."

But these people were crying that the man was a crook! Well, Mr. Ledeen wanted to "construct" a democracy headed by this man who happens to be his friend (his own words) and he did not want anyone, including the State Department and the CIA to argue!

It is truly comic that the gentleman in question is now publicly supporting Moqtada.

"The depth of Iraqi revulsion at these two intemperate decisions can be probed by looking at the better Iraqi blogs (like Iraq the Model, or Hammorabi, or Iraq & Iraqis)."

Three blogs to gauge the "depth" of Iraqi public reaction! Please count this humble blog next time. A 75% majority against 25% looks better than one of 100% consensus!

"It would seem intuitively obvious that the rule of law is the bedrock of democracy, and that we should have devoted energy and passion to getting the process under way. Which brings us back to another failure: An Iraqi judge issued an arrest warrant for Moqtada six months ago, yet he was never arrested."

"An Iraqi judge" appointed by Mr. Paul Bremer cannot constitute "the rule of law"!! Incidentally, the very same judge has now issued a warrant for the arrest of his choice for the "democratic" leadership of Iraq: Mr. Chalabi.

He ends the article with a dictum from his mentor:

"Remember one of the early dicta of Machiavelli: If you are victorious, everyone will judge your methods to have been appropriate. If you lose, you're a bum."

Translation: Winning is everything…Might is right!
This is worse than "The end justifies the means".

Well, most of us know that he has already lost but he does not know it yet… unless you call causing so much damage to the US winning!

I f this is the caliber of the present administration's strategist, no wonder why the whole campaign has been such a mess.


I'm afraid that Mr.Ledeen's views are representative of such a large segment of US opinion that the problem of the US in the world is just not going to go away. The message is clear to all; arm to the teeth and prepare to defend yourself.

Congratulations on a superb blog.
Henrietta, UK

What is the source for the civilian casualties in Fallujah? As I recall, the hospital official in the initial reports who stated "mostly women and children were killed" recanted his story in subsequent days and said that he felt he had to say those things or else the terrorists would get made at him.

"After the death of more than 700 people including some 200 women and children (not to mention the injured) to avenge the ugly murder of four security men by a few villains through 21 days of bombing and mass punishment… the man wants more blood!"

First of all, this is not true. The death of those people (whatever the true figures are) was to assert Iraqi Law over the area. Those who oppose that, got shot. It had nothing to do with revenge. Asserting control there means that the terrorists would not have a safe place to hide. Because control was not asserted there, terrorists went there, and then made car bombs. Then you turn around and complain about the car bombs. And instead of directing your complaints to the terrorists, or those who asked for the US troops to leave Fallujah, you direct it instead at the US! This is just whacko logic.

I'm not going to defend Leeden's "alternate plan" because I think what Bush actually did (ie the real plan) is the best (ie least worst) available. I don't think Bush has done a single thing wrong. So I'll defend Bush, not Leeden, on that one.

You had another complaint about the Iraqi judge not representing Iraqi law. That is not true either. Like it or not, the plan was to set up a normal country where freedom of speech existed and human rights were respected. This was done. Anyone who opposes protection of human rights etc loses any such rights themselves, and is subsequently shot/arrested. All the institutions are in place and are behaving as expected. You may not like it, but it's a done deal. If you want to reverse this, you need to overthrow the government. It is not technically possible to overthrow the government, because there is a massive disparity in firepower.

The only way you can dislodge this government is by voting it out of power. You will get an opportunity to do so.

Out of curiosity, can you tell me which Iraqi law you think is so bad that you would wish to see a different government in power so that you can change the law? The Iraqi laws look virtually identical to Australian laws to me, and I wouldn't want to change any significant Australian laws. They already give me most of what I want, e.g. freedom of speech, freedom of religion, opportunity to start a business, or go and work for whoever I want to create a good life for my family, etc etc.

mpeachw, will you stop cutting and pasting from articles? If you want to know the answers to entire articles, they can be found at You may not understand the answers though, with your Communist/Islamofascist blinkers on.

If you have specific points of your own that you would like answered, ask them, and I'll explain. You may find a more conducive enviornment over at:

and you may find the answers already here:

If you would like something from the Weekly Standard explained to you, feel free to post a message in:
and I'll do my best to explain it to you. Although it is all predicated on you being able to understand reality instead of knowing nothing except how to shout slogans. Here's a slogan for you - "Communism only killed 100 million people - let's give it another chance".

What are you using as a measure of success? The Iraqi holocaust is over. Iraqis now have freedom of speech instead of having their tongues cut out. Oil revenue is no longer being used to fund nefarious activities. It's one of those win/win situations. In another maybe 6 months there will be sufficient ING such that the Iraqis can take care of themselves. What more did you want? Overnight Utopia? Japan and Germany took 7 years and 5 years respectively. Iraq has been compressed to a bit over 2 years. An amazing feat. Not sure if that means that the Iraqis are smart or the Japanese and Germans are dumb, but regardless, it's a miracle. Thanks America!

Quoting M. Ladeen:
Remember one of the early dicta of Machiavelli: If you are victorious, everyone will judge your methods to have been appropriate. If you lose, you're a bum.

K Attaturk was victorious in Turkey--he made Turkey a Moslem nation, while suppressing much of devout Islam. For decades later (perhaps even until today?) it was/(is?) illegal for followers of Mevlana Rumi to openly practice their dance (at least in Konya). Up until the last few years, conservative Islam was suppressed, and had little or no effect on the Turkish government.

Now--let's see who approves of Attaturk's policies--shall we inquire of the devout Moslems? What about the surviving Pontic Greeks (or their descendants)? Maybe the Assyrians? Or perhaps the Armenians?
One gains such unanimity of approbation by eliminating ALL of the opposition, which Attaturk did not do.

Students of Central Asian history note the high culture which Tamerlane's descendants developed. However I know of no one who approves of Tamerlane's methods (perhaps they merely disapprove of his goals).

I will be very disappointed in the responder if I also am referred to as an Islamo-Communist.

Be Well,
Bob Grifin
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Listed on Blogwise