If you had any illusions of Joseph C. Wilson’s nonpartisan credentials, consider his new admission that he hoped the Oct. 15 referendum on the Iraq Constitution would fail.
The Oakland Tribune reports on Wilson’s speech two nights ago to star-struck San Francisco State students:
He said he hoped that the Iraqi constitution vote had failed, not because he wanted to see the [Bush] administration fail but because he believed a negative vote would cause America and others to rethink their strategy and "go back to the drawing board."
It’s about time that Wilson grow up and face the truth. He didn’t hope that Constitution failed for any good reason. He hoped it failed because he hoped President Bush would fail.
What if? Had that referendum failed, the democratization of Iraq would not have stopped. However, it certainly would have been delayed, and that delay would have pushed back the date that Iraqis take full responsibility for their own security. It would have meant greater risks, for a longer period, to American troops. But Wilson didn’t care about that.
He’d rather have more Americans die than see a Republican president succeed. He’d rather embarrass Bush than free Iraq. His self-centered partisanship never ends.
Frank Warner
He should be tarred and feathered.
Posted by: George | October 20, 2005 at 01:30 PM
You could argue that if the constitution was voted down, it would give Sunnis a feeling of participation, and it could do a lot to end violence. That's just a theory though. I don't know whether it would have turned out that way.
Like many of us have been saying, the referrendum is a victory no matter which way the constitution goes. It's democracy. I think they're better off with this constitution (and amend it later if necessary) but I haven't read it cover-to-cover...
Posted by: Nicholas | October 20, 2005 at 03:31 PM
At least he's being honest. Most of the far-left won't admit that they want to see America lose. Without that admission, it is impossible to have a meaningful dialogue with them.
Of course, the next step is to ask him how many soldier deaths his anti-war statements have caused, and see if he can be honest about that too.
Posted by: Kevin | October 20, 2005 at 04:39 PM
It's half honest. Wilson doesn't know how to deliver a full truth. He said he wanted the Iraq Constitution to fail, but not because he wanted the Bush administration to fail.
Posted by: Frank Warner | October 20, 2005 at 05:24 PM
And Nicholas,
The Sunni Arabs were involved in drafting the Iraq Constitution. They won enough concessions that the main Sunni-Arab political party endorsed the draft.
Starting from scratch on writing the Constitution would have brought along all sorts of dangers, not the least of which would have been the possibility that the majority Shiites would turn on the Constitution. Just imagine the conspiracy theories that a delay could inspire.
The Iraqi Consitution won about 70 percent of Iraqi voters. Which other nation on Earth could get that large a majority for a new Constitution?
It's in everyone's best interest to settle quickly on the basic form of government, elect a government democratically, and move on. With a government fully up and running, Iraq can complete the raising of its army much more easily, and that means Americans can come home a lot earlier.
It just boils my blood that Joe Wilson was out there hoping for car bombs and "no votes" on Iraq referendum day, and praying that democracy would fail.
Posted by: Frank Warner | October 20, 2005 at 06:13 PM
Yes, I am aware Sunnis were involved in drafting the constitution and I think that's great.
The question is, does the average Sunni feel they have had sufficient input also? If not, how can we make them feel empowered?
The more empowered they feel by politics, the less likely they will turn to violence for empowerment, I think. At least, the reasonable ones, anyway. A good portion of "normal" Sunnis seem to feel that the violence "resistance" is valid - despite the fact that it's against a government in which they have fair representation.
I hope that will change, with the adoption of this constitution and the next elections.
Once the average Sunni is sick of violence, and wants things to get back to normal, the "insurgency" will be in serious trouble (well, even more serious...).
I'm waiting with interest for proper referrendum results. I want to see if any majority-Sunni areas voted overwhelmingly yes, like the original preliminary figures said. If so, that's great - let's welcome them to democracy!
Posted by: Nicholas | October 20, 2005 at 07:23 PM
I doubt any Sunni Arab areas voted overwhelmingly yes. The idea now should be to move on to the regular activities of government: policing neighborhoods, keeping the lights on, educating children, and debating, debating, debating until the next election.
Iraq's new democracy needs a routine. The lack of a routine only invites mischief and mayhem.
That's the good thing about adopting the Constitution. It sets the rules for the new routine.
Posted by: Frank Warner | October 20, 2005 at 07:51 PM
Wilson said he remains "fueled by the optimism of the 1960s". Very telling. You know he is not talking about the Apollo program.
It wasn´t optimism, it was abdication of responsibility.
Posted by: werner | October 23, 2005 at 03:27 PM
"The only debate about Joseph Wilson's credibility is the one taking place at the Washington Post and the New York Times."
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/006/266weygj.asp?pg=1
Posted by: George | October 26, 2005 at 08:59 AM