July 18th, 2008 by Matt

First, the Washington Post takes aim, decrying Obama’s “foolish consistency” on a timetable for withdrawal, and predicting that it will be extremely difficult to achieve in the manner Obama presents it.  The Post also criticizes Obama’s “irrational” and “indifferent” behavior toward the grander strategic ramifications of the war, reiterating how Iraq is “vital” to U.S. security interests, as it sits at the “strategic center” of the Middle East on “some of the world’s largest oil reserves”.  Matt Yglesias sarcastically rebuts the notion that we should care about Iraq because of oil strategy:

“Oops, did I say democracy promotion? I meant to say that Iraq has a lot of oil so we need to try to micromanage its future. And yet it’s precisely this impulse — the belief that we desperately need to retain “influence” in oil-possessing parts of the world that got us into the corrupt bargain with the Arab autocracies that produced the conditions under which al-Qaeda arose and began targeting us. Remember when Iraq was supposed to be part of a drive for reform that changed that dynamic? Oh for the heady days of the Arab spring.”

Also, The Wall Street Journal rips Obama’s “judgment” on the surge.

Posted in Democracy Promotion, Election 08, Iraq, US foreign policy, US politics |