ninety minute nationalist

At last a comment from among those who supported the war on Iraq which at least mentions what is actually going on there now, or so I thought. Unfortunately, this is only another laying the blame session, (where it mainly lies, to be fair). However this appears to be, at least partly, a means of avoiding a discussion of the manner in which the coalition is carrying out the conflict.

For example take this;

"One might have thought that, whatever reasons opponents of what I have called the first war had for opposing it, they ought to have been in tune with these objectives (stabilisation and democracy). But because of the way in which blame is standardly assigned in the anti-war camp, with the Coalition always taking the main or only hit, it - the Coalition - is seen as responsible for the fact that stabilization and democratic transition haven't happened yet or aren't likely to"

OK, so the point is the blame lies mainly, almost wholly, even ultimately, with the 'resistance'. As someone who opposed the war I can agree with that on the whole, however it doesn't follow that the coalition is squeaky clean and bears no responsibility? And I don't mean just Abu Ghraib. Yet where is the evaluation of the coalition's campaign.

What we have instead is a reiteration of the idea that the leaders of the coalition went into the invasion of Iraq primarily to bring about some kind of democracy to Iraq and certainly that that is now the main aim of the coalition's campaign. Should everything the coalition does be seen in the light of that motivation? I don't think that's good enough. Even if you believe the coalition has only the best of motives you would need to examine how the war was being conducted.

I have yet to see any left-wing, pro-war advocate make it clear how they feel about the way the coalition is conducting its campaign, as opposed to their feelings of misgiving in relation to individual or group aberrations (if that is what they are), such as the execution of a wounded insurgent or the torture at Abu Ghraib. And Norman Geras's piece doesn't fill that gap.