Rather than do the right thing and resign as secretary of defense, Donald Rumsfeld has lashed out at critics of the Iraq war and the war on terror generally, comparing them to those who would have appeased Hitler. “[A]ny kind of moral or intellectual confusion about who and what is right or wrong can weaken the ability of free societies to persevere,” said Rumsfeld. As Marc Cooper notes, this speech was delivered “only a week after his boss and chief enabler, GW Bush, swore to the nation that this administration would never, ever, under any conditions as much as dream of questioning the patriotism of war critics.”
Of course this is Rumsfeld’s pathetic attempt to change the subject from his own incompetence, not to mention his behind-the-scenes advocacy of torture and trashing of the Geneva Conventions — you know, those “quaint” international norms meant to preserve the distinction between right and wrong that Rumsfeld claims to care so much about.
This is not to say that “moral and intellectual confusion” doesn’t exist on the left; in the case of people like John Pilger, George Galloway, Alexander Cockburn and others, “confusion” is putting it far too mildly. I’m well aware that Rumsfeld’s targets include just about anyone to his and the president’s left. Debunking the extreme left worldview remains important, however — not for Rumsfeld’s reasons, but because decent and coherent politics simply demands it. And because the extremos, who have a way of dominating the street-protest landscape, give people like Rumsfeld something to hang their hat on.
Comments are closed.