Robert Fisk's The Ghosts of Vietnam
comments powered by Disqus
Sudha Shenoy - 12/31/2004
How would you know you had 'seen it through'/'finished the job'? Seen *what* through? 'Finished' *what* job? This is a recipe for indefinite occupation:there are no criteria to tell us what 'the job' (or 'it') is.Moreover this view presumes that Iraq is a blank slate; the complexities of the historical reality are not even remotely suspected.
Steven Horwitz - 12/31/2004
That argument is particularly ironic if made by classical liberal economists who should not be falling for the sunk cost fallacy that way. I'll gladly play poker with anyone who thinks we should be "in for a penny, in for a pound."
David T. Beito - 12/31/2004
Another variation on this theme is the following: some libertarians(and leftists) concede that U.S. intervention in Iraq was a bad idea but then argue we now have an obligation to "see it through" and "finish the job." I could never see the logic of this antiwar pro-occupation position. If intervening produced negative consequences, wouldn't staying in Iraq only compound these negative consequences?
- Did a historian who said he’s a victim of McCarthyism get the story wrong?
- Stephanie Coontz’s work on the history of marriage cited by the Supreme Court.
- NYT History Book Reviews: Who Got Noticed this Week?
- David Hackett Fischer wins $100,000 prize for lifetime achievement in military writing