America's Undistinguished Record of Nation Building

Max Sawicky speaks:

What seems to me an underplayed, important article in the weekend Outlook section of the Post, the undistinguished U.S. record of nation-building. This is the sort of thing that should have been front and center for all the liberal supporters of the Iraqi mission, among others, but moral imperatives seemed to hold sway instead. 'We have to' trumps 'we can do.'

The other side of the coin is the excerpt by "Anonymous," the CIA analyst oddly celebrated by some left-of-center commentators. Libs like A's demolition of the rationales and performance of the Bushies, but his solution is pretty scary and not convincing. Basically he seems to recommend unprecedented, indiscriminate destruction of Muslim populations that harbor terrorists. It's clash of civilizations stuff, with the ideological scruple that we are not really against Muslim civilization, just violent anti-American Muslims who happen to be randomly scattered throughout Muslim civilization.

This sort of world view -- a more sophisticated, heretical view of the "root causes" -- coupled with maniacal policy recommendations could emerge if there is another successful, horrendous attack. Something to not look forward to.

Now that second article cited is interesting for several reasons, including this passage:

One of the greatest dangers for Americans in deciding how to confront the Islamist threat lies in continuing to believe -- at the urging of senior U.S. leaders -- that Muslims hate us and attack us for what we are and what we think, rather than for what we do. The Islamic world is not so offended by our democratic system of politics, guarantees of personal rights and civil liberties, and separation of church and state that it is willing to wage war against overwhelming odds to stop Americans from voting, speaking freely, and praying, or not, as they wish. With due respect for those who have concluded that we are hated for what we are, think and represent, I beg to disagree and contend that your conclusion is errant and potentially fatal nonsense.