Random neuron firing, lame philosophy, literary pontificating, movies, sex, clothes & other femme stuff

Monday, April 19, 2004

Iraq: I was wrong but I was right anyway

Kieran at Crooked Timber links to Matt Yglesias's post predicting an onslaught of sua culpa pieces:
David Brooks offers the first of what I think will be many retrospective I was wrong but I was right anyway articles. The implication here is that though Bush may botch everything in Iraq, Brooks was nevertheless correct to have supported the war because he, after all, was not in favor of botching things.

One anticipates that other people -- Thomas F., or shall we call him T. Friedman -- will be offering similar theories soon.
This reminds Kieran of a remark by the late philosopher David Lewis, which I'd never heard before but will certainly remember:
You say you have a counterexample to my argument, but you must be misunderstanding me, because I did not intend for my argument to have any counterexamples.

Matt's post is worth quoting further:
The trouble, however, is this. When George W. Bush is president and is advocating a war and you, too, are advocating for war, then the fact of the matter is that you are advocating that the war be conducted by George W. Bush. That Bush would botch things was a perfectly predictable consequence of said support, based on -- among other things -- the fact that he'd botched everything else he'd ever done.
Comments: Post a Comment

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

Listed on BlogShares