Larry Johnson has been watching and listening to Paul Bremer flog his book, and begs to differ.
I wrote a paper and circulated the draft among several friends and former colleagues, including Jerry Bremer. The paper prominently featured these judgments:An invasion of Iraq will topple Hussein and eliminate Baghdad’s ability to develop or use weapons of mass destruction for the foreseeable future, but it will do little to destroy the infrastructure of radical Islamic terrorism responsible for the 9-11 attacks. In fact there is a serious risk that a U.S. led war against Iraq may crystallize the diffused anger in the Arab and Muslim world—a heretofore unattained goal of bin Laden and his followers—and persuade more Muslim youths to take up the terrorist banner against America and her citizens.
If we go to war we must prudently prepare for expanded terrorist activity, at least in the short term, from Islamic extremists and their sympathizers. While we can hope that a US invasion will unleash a pent up Jeffersonian democracy inside Iraq, odds are that the United States and its UN allies will be forced to occupy Iraq for the foreseeable future. No occupying force, no matter how benign or charitable, will avoid facing opposition at some point from the local population. Add to this mix a belligerent outsider, like Iran, and the potential for terrorist attacks against the “occupying” force increases dramatically.
Jerry responded by telling me I was missing the point. That it did not matter what Saddam’s record on terrorism was. We were going to war and he would be deposed. I tried to get the paper published but no one in the main stream media was interested.
Johnson goes on to explain further efforts made on his part as well as that of others (notably Pat Lang, whom many of us remember from his appearances on The News Hour) were similarly ignored, and says that Bremer's book is an attempt at whitewash. Johnson's article is well worth a read.
Via Wolcott.
Posted by Linkmeister at January 16, 2006 03:38 PM | TrackBack