Skip to main content

Better Plans for Iraq

The most amazing thing to me...

Suppose America had made our plans taking into account the long history, the unfamiliarity of the Iraqi people with concepts of equal protection under the law (more important, actually, than democracy, which can still abuse minorities) and we made our plans differently.

Different than we did.

Are there any plans that would have transformed the assumptions and attitudes of the Iraqi people in three or four years?

Let's get some liberal social scientists on this one, okay? How long to tranform... given a "psychological program"... how long to transform attitudes? Consider the age of the population, quite young, flexible, how long until children have never really known any different?

Oh yeah, we screwed up because we didn't have a plan that would do all that in THREE FREAKING YEARS.

So let's give up... leave them to figure it out themselves, since it's ultimately up to them.

At the same time, let's explain why we have *any* social assistance program longer than three years and why we view our own disadvantaged groups and their learned cultures as requiring anything more than a stiff scolding and let them sink or swim on their own effort.

Hmm?

Anyone paying attention NEVER had any illusions about how long this process would take. Or else they are just lying.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Tyranny.gov vs Tyranny.com

Compulsion is Compulsion, no matter who does it.  This is Brilliant Theft is Theft, no matter who does it. Freedom of Association has no room in it for *private* action   that takes that away Freedom of Association. If I have a business and have voluntary associations such that I choose to serve some people and to not serve others, that might make me a jerk and it might lose me business, it might make me smart and it might gain me business, but it's got to be my choice.  If I would normally serve the current disliked minority in my shop except for the fact that if I'm SEEN to serve them by the wrong people I'll have a private campaign against me as those people do everything possible to ruin me by preventing me from doing business physically or by attacking my customers or suppliers, then I am NOT free to make those choices. Does it really make a difference to losing my CHOICE to voluntarily associate if there's a law that says I may not serve "those people" o...

Some times some people.

 

What Cancel Culture is NOT

  Maybe we should talk about what cancel culture isn't. It's not a boycott.  It's not deciding to no longer go to a business. It's not giving a bad review for bad service. It generally involves two things. First, the offense is a matter of opinion. Second, secondary or even tertiary targets are threatened. Cancellation does not need to be successful, and often with very famous and wealthy people it is not successful. But it serves as a warning to vulnerable people who are not in a position to weather that kind of attack. The goal is terroristic in that it's about forcing social behavior in people who are not currently the subject of the attack. The message is always, this could happen to you. And the tactic invariably includes seeking out vulnerable people to threaten in order to put pressure on businesses or on the target of the attack. So it works like this: JK Rowling is invulnerable. But they can try, right? So what they do is they find out who works for the pub...