Time's Klein attacked "ill-informed dilettante[ ]"war opponents by citing war supporter who contradicted himself on troop increase
SUMMARY: To support his assertion that Democrats who oppose President Bush's possible plan to increase U.S. forces in Iraq risk "sound[ing] like ill-informed dilettantes," Joe Klein attacked The New York Times' Paul Krugman for not mentioning, in a recent column, that retired Gen. Jack Keane, among others, supports a troop increase. However, Keane recently appeared to support plans to send "[a]n additional 20,000 troops" to Iraq, despite having asserted, less than two weeks earlier, that adding "at least 30,000 combat troops" was the "only" option to "[b]ring security to Baghdad."
In his second January 8 post to the Time.com political weblog Swampland, Joe Klein -- the magazine's "most liberal columnist" -- attacked "illiberal leftists and reactionary progressives" who took issue with his first post, in which he asserted that Democrats who oppose President Bush's possible plan to increase the level of U.S. troops in Iraq run the risk of "sound[ing] like ill-informed dilettantes." To support this assertion, Klein attacked New York Times columnist Paul Krugman for not mentioning, in a recent column (subscription required), that retired Gen. Jack Keane, among others, supports a troop increase. But, as Media Matters for America documented, in an appearance on the January 8 edition of ABC's Good Morning America, Keane, former Army vice chief of staff and an ABC News contributor, appeared to support plans to send "[a]n additional 20,000 troops" to Iraq, despite having asserted, less than two weeks earlier, that adding "at least 30,000 combat troops lasting 18 months or so" was the "only" option to "[b]ring security to Baghdad." Keane did not explain the apparent discrepancy. In addition, according to the January 8 edition of Newsweek, an unnamed "former senior Army official" alleged that Keane has been advised by the Army's vice chief of staff that "the actual figures on readiness" show that Keane's plan to increase troops for the length of time needed to secure Iraq was "not doable."
Media Matters has noted Klein's pattern of attacking Democrats, especially on national security issues, such as his claim in his column for the June 26, 2006, edition of Time that the party is "not known for its warrior ethic." In his first Swampland post, Klein warned that Democrats "have to be careful not to sound like ill-informed dilettantes" when talking about and opposing Bush's possible plan to send additional U.S. forces to Iraq, while acknowledging that Democrats were nevertheless "right" in opposing the plan. Even so, Klein concluded that "[l]iberals won't ever be trusted on national security until they start doing their homework" and suggested that supporters of a troop increase such as Keane had done the required homework.
After several Swampland readers took issue with Klein's first post, he published a follow-up:
I love it! First day of Swampitude and the left-wing blogosphere -- which is overpopulated by illiberal leftists and reactionary progressives -- is already attacking me: 24 mostly mingy comments about my Left Behind post, many of which seem to be steaming off a post by Greg Sargent, who writes a blog called The Horse's...Mouth. The illiberal left just hates it when I point out that the Democratic Party's naivete on national security -- and the left wing tendency to assume every U.S. military action abroad is criminal -- just aren't very helpful electorally. The fact that I've been opposed to the Iraq war ever since this 2002 article in Slate just makes it all the more aggravating. But it's possible to have been against the war and to hope for the best in Iraq. I'd bet that the overwhelming majority of Americans who now oppose the war are praying for a turn for the better in Iraq. Listening to the leftists, though, it's easy to assume that they are rooting for an American failure.
And so a challenge to those who slagged me in their comments. Can you honestly say the following:
Even though I disagree with this escalation, I am hoping that General [David] Petraeus succeeds in calming down Baghdad.
Does the thought even cross your mind? As for me, it's easy -- I've been rooting for U.S. success ever since the invasion because, after the overpowering arrogance and stupidity that led to this disaster, we owe some peace and stability to the Iraqis and the region. For the record, I'm outraged Bush is ignoring the election results and the reality on the ground in Iraq. I think he is sending more young American lives into an impossible situation. I am fairly certain that Bush will wallow amongst our worst presidents for getting us into this mess. But I hope events prove me wrong. I don't even care if Bush gets credit for the "victory" and smirks all the way back to Texas. -- joe klein
As noted on the weblog Eschaton (written by Atrios, Media Matters senior fellow Duncan Black), discussing the Iraq war on the February 22, 2003, edition of CNBC's Tim Russert show, Klein said about the decision to go to war in Iraq: "This is a really tough decision. War may well be the right decision at this point. In fact, I think ... it probably is."
See one liberal blogger's smackdown...
[link to www2.boomantribune.com]
This whole episode of Klein venturing into the blogosphere has a peculiar storyline when you consider it is one whereby one of Time's more respected columnists goes head-to-head with Time's Person(s?) of the Year.
And so far, Klein appears hopelessly overmatched.
gonna have to watch that blogger :)
...and the drunk driving analogy is perfect.
"I've been rooting for U.S. success ever since the invasion because, after the overpowering arrogance and stupidity that led to this disaster"...Joe Klein
May I add ONE word here that Klein left out and shouldn't have?
*I've been rooting for U.S. success ever since the invasion because, after the overpowering arrogance, stupidity & DECEPTION that led to this disaster...*
"....we owe some peace and stability to the Iraqis and the region"...Joe Klein
Mmmmmm, seems to me that there WAS more peace & stability in Iraq BEFORE we invaded that sovereign nation. Yes, they were under the thumb of an EVIL dictator, as are many others nations. We can't rescue them all.
Also bringing peace & stability to a region that has had neither for thousands of years sounds nice...BUT cannot be achieved UNTIL the population in that region [really] wants it.
Klein MAY think he's a Liberal, BUT in reality he's just another Bush apologist.
that Joe was trying to make a factual case. It is pretty obvious he was not, and succeded in that...
I'm not sure that Klein claims to be a Liberal, I'm pretty sure he doesn't unless he's using the definition some conservatives use to define LIberal which I gather means anyone who isn't a Conservative or Orielly's definition of Liberal which means anyone who disagrees with O'rielly on anything. There is a whole lot of inbetween between Conservative and Liberal.
I was kinda of going by what MMFA included in the above article:
*In his second January 8 post to the Time.com political weblog Swampland, Joe Klein -- the magazine's "most liberal columnist"*
But the quotation marks SHOULD have tipped me off that Klein probably isn't considered a Liberal, at least by other Liberal/Progressives. I don't know that he's thought of as a Conservative either. Like you said--there's a lot in-between.
I probably should have just described Klein as a : Bush Apologist.
You can count on from a brutal dictator like Saddam is stability. The whole peace and stability question is the right one though. See the proper question here is CAN this administration POSSIBLY put out a fire if the only thing they are willing to use is gasoline. The military is not a scalpel it is a broadsword, there are things it can do incredibly well and things it cannot do at ALL. Bismark said something like fighting a preventative war is like committing suicide to because of your fear of death. You dont bring peace by increasing the level of violence nor by adding more hated targets and NO ONE WANTS TO BE OCCUPIED BY FORIEGN TROOPS. Whether peace and stability can be brought to the country at ALL at this point is a difficult question to answer but its pretty easy to see it wont be brought there by more war.
>>Klein: "the left wing tendency to assume every U.S. military action abroad is criminal "<<<
The "left wing", Mr. Klein, was, and still is, almost totally supportive of U.S. action in Afghanistan. No one I know has called what we're doing there "criminal". In fact, that is of course where our focus should have been, not in Iraq-an action which you could have firmly opposed but didn't.
Klein concluded that “[l]iberals won't ever be trusted on national security until they start doing their homework” and suggested that supporters of a troop increase such as Keane had done the required homework.
Here, ladies and germs, Joe Klein is tipping his cap to a classic, the old “need to do some homework/research” comeback. And Klein’s supporting documentation, his “homework”? A retired general who contradicts himself. And why not sprinkling in few links to warblogger sites for good measure, Mr. Kline, for there’s nothing more educated and elucidatory than the rabidly partisan opinions of the very ilk who decry liberalism as having failed to “do its homework” on any subject which they decide to apply this stale, fabricated “benchmark”.
The “real homework” is interpreting this surge for what it is: a halfway solution without tactical merit. It stinks of politics. Bush waits till the Democrats have been in charge for a WEEK then springs this BS surge on them, and why? To pin the Iraq tail on the Donkeys. The Decider has decided to transmogrify a Republican war into a Democratic war for the sake of his Party in 2008. Don’t think it’ll work? It already has. People were asking “why don’t the Democrats do something about Iraq?” BEFORE the swearing in ceremony. Like it or not, the public has passed the Iraq buck to the Democrats, and they better spend it wisely.
Basically Klein is saying that us war opponents that have been right about every single thing in the context of Iraq are uninformed yet the administration appologist pundit class who have, with their God given insight, been WRONG about every single aspect of the war in Iraq are somehow the ones that DONT need to do their homework. Perhaps he is mistaking indoctrination with education.
one of Stephen Colbert's "Who's Attacking Me Now" segments.
Except, you know, not entertaining.
is there is not a military solution here. this has nothing to do with self defense. it is just an attempt to buy more time and as joe biden said, pass it off to the next president. funny how klein can find the time to call krugman a "fool", and not have the same description of the people, unlike krugman, who helped lead us into disaster and have refused to admit their errors. to make this a bit more germane to this site, klein is "pulling a tommy" here. he says all the right things about what a disaster this is, and then proceeds to attack the people who have called it every inch of the way.