Well, that's a paraphrase. But, color him unimpressed, to the nth degree. Another morose classic!
We're still waiting on the latest Rall cartoon/opinion piece. In the meantime, we can make do with one of his pals, Pat Oliphant...goes well with the Kos, doesn't it?
Mon Jan 31st, 2005 at 08:42:30 PST
The administration, press, and wingnut blogosphere is all atwitter over the "successful" Iraqi elections.
But the fact that 8 million Iraqis voted is not the measure of success. Just like catching Saddam wasn't, or occupying Baghdad, or transfering "sovereignty". Those events are miletones toward the ultimate outcome, but unpredictive whether that outcome is victory or defeat. And elections, historically, aren't the end-all be-all for defeating insurgencies. There was Vietnam, 1967:
United States officials were surprised and heartened today at the size of turnout in South Vietnam's presidential election despite a Vietcong terrorist campaign to disrupt the voting.
And nations with vicious civil wars, like Guatemala, El Salvador, Colombia, Sri Lanka, Peru, and so on staged elections (of various legitimacy) even while facing down insurgencies.
January was the third bloodiest month for US and allied troops. Will that cease now that Iraqis have voted? Nope. Will economic sabotage of Iraq stop? Nope. Will the terrorists lay down arms? Nope. Will the insurgents? Nope.
The war will continue unabated.
War :: Link & Discuss (178 comments)