I find it fascinating how the original decision to oppose the Iraq war - protracted over the course of the last five years - has poisoned the minds of everyone in the anti-war lobby.

It has led them to root for more and more disasters and bloodshed in Iraq to prop-up their initial logic, and to "help" the campaign of their preferred presidential candidate. It has led them to portray US soldiers as a bunch of torturing thugs. It has led them to defend the rule of Saddam Hussein as preferable to what Iraqis have now, and to question whether democracy is a cause worth fighting or dying for.

Now, as attested by the scornful posts below, these same people are begrudging the value of foreign-language learning and the benefit of foreign aid.

Victor Hugo once said there is nothing more powerful than an idea whose time has come. By the same token, there is nothing less defensible than an idea whose time has passed.

I agree with you completely. I'm flabbergasted how anyone could object to an act of good will. If it's between my old textbooks collecting dust in my basement and donating them to a university without books, well then, I think we can see which is actually the good option.

Did you actually read any other posts below? Do you realize that this school is an expensive private college in a town that already has a large, inexpensive, and well attended public university?

Do you realize that Hitchens is just using this story in an effort make liberals look heartless and hypocritical? This is not an "act of good will."

I hope you aren't really this naive.

NO WAY! not as long as Chimpy McHitlerburton is in the White House, and not swinging from a rope... i will not contribute to yet another act of evil american imperialism! this is just a devious ploy by that drunken silver-tongued NEOCON ATHEIST Hitchens and his cronies to steal more OIL from the Iraqis (who everyone knows can't read anyway!)...

NO BOOKS FOR OIL!!

Victor Hugo once said there is nothing more powerful than an idea whose time has come. By the same token, there is nothing less defensible than an idea whose time has passed.

Right you are. Hitchens' neocon imperial shuck n' jive has proven indefensible. He's just to invested, embedded and inebriated to notice.

GreenwichJ:

Victor Hugo once said there is nothing more powerful than an idea whose time has come. By the same token, there is nothing less defensible than an idea whose time has passed.

That idea being the neocon delusion that you can reshape the middle east by force, right?

I don't have any score for any effort to help people get a better education. Unlike most neocons, I hold education in high esteem and don't sneer at people who want to learn more about the world around us as "elitists".

What I do have scorn for, and I've made this very clear, despite the efforts of people like Early Bird to misrepresent it, is Hitch trying to convince people that donating a few books is some kind of major sacrifice on par with the sacrifices that have been made by our active duty military and their families.

GreenwichJ:

I find it fascinating how the original decision to oppose the Iraq war - protracted over the course of the last five years - has poisoned the minds of everyone in the anti-war lobby.

It has led them to root for more and more disasters and bloodshed in Iraq to prop-up their initial logic, and to "help" the campaign of their preferred presidential candidate. It has led them to portray US soldiers as a bunch of torturing thugs. It has led them to defend the rule of Saddam Hussein as preferable to what Iraqis have now, and to question whether democracy is a cause worth fighting or dying for.

Now, as attested by the scornful posts below, these same people are begrudging the value of foreign-language learning and the benefit of foreign aid.

Victor Hugo once said there is nothing more powerful than an idea whose time has come. By the same token, there is nothing less defensible than an idea whose time has passed.

You want scornful? You got it. You want it, you thrive on it. Without scorn, you would have no reason to whine. I'm fascinated by the number of idiots, like yourself, who make baseless, slanderous claims against your countrymen to mask the cowardly ineptitude of the right for the last seven years. I have yet to see anyone on the news on any network, TV or Radio "root for more and more disasters and bloodshed in Iraq". However, I have heard many talking heads on Faux Snooze make the same claims without a single quote or shred of videotape documenting such claims. I would wager that Faux, mAnn Coulter and Rush The Flaccid Junkie are your primary source of disinformation and baseless opinion.

I wonder if you would vote for McBush if the military draft were reinstated? I happen to support the reinstatement of the draft as long as there are no deferments and as long as everyone serves, no exceptions.

Iraq? Screw them. We've been sticking our noses in the business of the world and also helped the world and fed the world for the last hundred years and for what? Scorn? I say its high time to go isolationist and tell the whining socialist countries and the barbarians of the countries of the African and South American continents to go knock on France's door or China's door the next time they need food, medicine or money. The money wasted on the Iraqi skirmish [It is not a war. Wars are waged to win and our "heroes" in Iraq who are supposedly mostly registered Republicans have demostrated their inability to control and conquer aboriginal young men in skirts with home made bombs in more years than it took the Democrats to lead us to Victory in two theaters of the Globe in World War Two!] would best serve this country if it remained in this country starting with Social Security.

mike_in_nm:

Do you realize that this school is an expensive private college in a town that already has a large, inexpensive, and well attended public university?

Yeah, and opening as many universities as possible is a horrible freakin' idea. People should have only one option for education!

It has led them to root for more and more disasters and bloodshed in Iraq to prop-up their initial logic, and to "help" the campaign of their preferred presidential candidate.

Rubbish. Many of us opposed the war before it began, before it was known who would be running for President in 2008. In fact, if you believed the neo-con bullshit, the war would have been over long ago.

We opposed the war because we didn't want to see more disaster and bloodshed in Iraq. We continue to call for an end of the occupation in the hope that it will help bring this terrible conflict to an end. However, many of us realize that the U.S. substantially fucked up in the invasion and restoring civil order to the country that was all wracked by years of war is no easy feat.

If Bush were to announce the beginning of a drawdown of U.S. troops tomorrow and this decision helped John McCain, I would cheer the decision.

It has led them to portray US soldiers as a bunch of torturing thugs.

Perhaps you have never heard of Abu Ghraib. Perhaps you missed the numerous reports of the U.S. admitting that it had tortured prisoners in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Guantanamo Bay. Maybe you missed all of the news reports about an Iraqi teenager drowning after U.S. soldiers forced him into the Tigris. I assume you also ignored the various human rights reports on Iraq. Perhaps you haven't heard about the lawsuits by average Iraqis against the U.S. and private contractors.

It has led them to defend the rule of Saddam Hussein as preferable to what Iraqis have now

Once again, rubbish. Anti-war individuals, by and large, do not defend the rule of Saddam Hussein. They have, however, pointed out that by many metrics Iraq is, indeed, worse off now than it was before the U.S. led invasion. However, most of us recognize it is not an "either/or" situation. Many of us favored working to remove Saddam Hussein, just not in the manner that Bush et al. decided to do it.

to question whether democracy is a cause worth fighting or dying for.

Of course, the United States was not fighting and dying for democracy. The original, official reason for going to war was to disarm Saddam Hussein because he continued to possess prohibited WMDs. This was all wrapped up in a larger anti-terrorism campaign with an attempt to link Iraq to the September 11 attacks.

The United States didn't invade Iraq to spread democracy and it doesn't remain in Iraq to keep this hope alive.

Did you happen to hear about Iraq opening up oil exploration today to foreign companies for the first time in 35 years. Did you catch that these are no-bid contracts going to U.S. and western European companies only? Amazing how the U.S. prepared more for dealing with Iraq's oil wealth than establishing a civil society. Democracy my ass.

Now, as attested by the scornful posts below, these same people are begrudging the value of foreign-language learning and the benefit of foreign aid.

One more time for the record: rubbish. The argument is that this is a hollow gesture masquareding as a benevolent gift that will turn the tide in Iraq. Sure, give some English-language books to a school that will educate a couple of thousand elite Iraqis over the next decade. Just don't pretend it is aiding democracy or emancipation, even in a small way.

By the same token, there is nothing less defensible than an idea whose time has passed.

Yes, it is indefinsible to still pretend that this war was about democracy. It is still indefinisible to argue that this war was just or the right thing.

Don’t listen to ‘em Greenwichj. This has nothing to do with the value of foreign aid. It's all about a pathological inability to see straight when Bush or Iraq comes up. No matter what happens, they will continue to bitterly and desperately scramble around for “reasons” to oppose anything and everything to do with any kind of progress in Iraq, no matter how good it is, no matter who's achieved it (unless maybe it's Obama - that would prove an interesting case study). Anything to distract themselves from the fear that they might be on the wrong side of history.

Most of us will be dead and gone before the world knows whether the so-called "Iraq War" was a success or failure. Hell, historians can't agree today on what really caused WWII, and when WWII officially started. Maybe Poland. Maybe China. Maybe Germany. Maybe Japan. Maybe 1939. Maybe 1936. Maybe 1933. Maybe 1918.

In the meantime, what could possibly be wrong with sending some books to a place that just might need them? If you are otherwise rational, that is.

It's no that much of a sacrifice, GreatBear, to send some books to Iraq. And Hitchens never said the sending of books would be some kind of sacrifice. He was saying, rightly or wrongly, that paying taxes and sending soldiers off to war was the sacrifice.

So, stop making excuses and talking in circles, and start a book drive for Iraqis, okay? Hey, it might help Iraq get a tiny bit better and that might help the neo-cons one iota, but it's still the right thing to do.

It's a lot better than rooting for the worst, just so you can stick it in the neo-cons eye.

Chill out asshole. We're not impressed with all your self righteous outrage.

You truly have lost your mind. I can see someone whispering the word "Bush" into your ear while you sleep, and you'd bolt upright out of REM sleep and rage on about Halliburton, no wars for oil, neo-cons, Hitchens.

The subject here is to help out the Iraqis with books. Being a liberal, who therefore supposedly cares about human beings, you might want to send some books.

But no! That might look like a tiny bit of progress there. Can't have that on Bush's watch!

EarlyBird:

It's no that much of a sacrifice, GreatBear, to send some books to Iraq. And Hitchens never said the sending of books would be some kind of sacrifice. He was saying, rightly or wrongly, that paying taxes and sending soldiers off to war was the sacrifice.

So, stop making excuses and talking in circles, and start a book drive for Iraqis, okay? Hey, it might help Iraq get a tiny bit better and that might help the neo-cons one iota, but it's still the right thing to do.

It's a lot better than rooting for the worst, just so you can stick it in the neo-cons eye.

Baloney. Hitch does describe it as a sacrifice. Why else would he bring up other sacrifices if not to equate it?

As for sticking it in the neocon's eye, all I can say is that Hitch started his column by sticking it in the eyes of the opponents of the occupation. Again, this was the lead of his article about how he didn't understand the criticism of a lack of sacrifice.

Yes, I realize that paying even a penny in taxes is considered a huge sacrifice to a neocon, but given that this is a war on credit, that sacrifice doesn't even hold water.

Donating books is a wonderful thing. Of course, I don't believe for a second it makes up for the great destruction Bush has inflicted on their country in this misguided and idiotically planned fiasco to get the WMDs, but hey, if it helps Hitch sleep at night, I'll send them my copy of Blackwater: Rise of the World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army.

But I'm pretty sure they're already familiar with its contents.

Sure, they can open as many universities as they like. Good for them. I am all in favor of options.

However, Hitchens described this school as some sort of savior of intellectual freedom in Iraq, a bastion of learning in an otherwise unserved location. Nothing could be further from the truth of the situation.

So, I dismiss this call for books as just a ploy to paint liberals as heartless and hypocritical, instead of a real plan to help someone.