Never in Doubt
Christopher Hitchens is erudite, witty, and an acute critic of almost everything except his own muddled thinking.
Only the last quality is much in evidence in his defense of his Iraq war advocacy. That defense consists mainly of inaccuracies and absurdities (we were always at war with Saddam/Westasia; an implausible list of supposed benefits accruing; the argument that the bad things that happened would have happened anyway if we had stayed out).
There is some quintessential pathos in his final argument: we meant well.
This must, and still does, count for something.
Pavement. It counts for pavement. That is the traditional valuation, I think.
Comments
Post a Comment