Politics runs in cycles, like anything else. You won't hear conservatives or liberals admit that they rarely achieve anything that lasts more than a few years; the 1950's ended in the liberal explosion of the 1960's, which ended up in the Reagan 1980's, which in turn prompted America to vote for a liberal twice in the 1990's, etc. A few fundamental principles like civil rights have stuck, fortunately.
An endlessly militaristic US foreign policy will bankrupt the country, overextend our forces and not prove tenable as a foreign policy in a world with multiple crosscutting issues. The US electorate also won't support these ideals endlessly (2004 is a tossup still, IMHO).
It will only be a matter of months before most people realize that terrorism is still a huge threat that comes from many groups in many countries, not one master nest that we attacked and overran in Afghanistan or Iraq. Liberating Iraqis from their tyranny is wonderful. It would be nicer if they didn't loot their own hospitals and museums and in effect, shoot themselves in the foot only moments after we shot the assholes holding them down before.
The second big realization will come when we see how Iraq sucks in the world's resources for reconstruction without contributing much to anyone else. The idea that Iraq will transform the whole Middle East by indirect osmosis is fanciful at best.
And all the billions we spend in Iraq could have been spent to improve homeland security here, where the terrorists will want to strike next, or improve our schools and medical care, or whatever. Imagine the comprehensive antiterrorism plan we could have implemented with $80 billion instead of hoping that smashing Saddam will have some positive effect somewhere down the line.
Take a step back and its an absurd use of scarce (and borrowed thanks to the deficit) resources. |
