Thomas Friedman lectures us on how stupid we've been.

[Little Raven]

Hello Pot. Have you spoken to kettle lately?

Not long ago, the satirical newspaper The Onion ran a fake news story that began like this:

“At a well-attended rally in front of his new ground zero headquarters Monday, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani officially announced his plan to run for president of 9/11. ‘My fellow citizens of 9/11, today I will make you a promise,’ said Giuliani during his 18-minute announcement speech in front of a charred and torn American flag. ‘As president of 9/11, I will usher in a bold new 9/11 for all.’ If elected, Giuliani would inherit the duties of current 9/11 President George W. Bush, including making grim facial expressions, seeing the world’s conflicts in terms of good and evil, and carrying a bullhorn at all state functions.”

Like all good satire, the story made me both laugh and cry, because it reflected something so true — how much, since 9/11, we’ve become “The United States of Fighting Terrorism.” Times columnists are not allowed to endorse candidates, but there’s no rule against saying who will not get my vote: I will not vote for any candidate running on 9/11. We don’t need another president of 9/11. We need a president for 9/12. I will only vote for the 9/12 candidate.

What does that mean? This: 9/11 has made us stupid. I honor, and weep for, all those murdered on that day. But our reaction to 9/11 — mine included — has knocked America completely out of balance, and it is time to get things right again.

Gee, Tommy, YA THINK?!?

Perhaps I'm being too hard on Friedman - he does at least seem to acknowledge that his judgment has been as skewed as anyone's. But then again perhaps not - this is the man who's name has become synonymous with 'six more months,' after all. Friedman, you will recall, argued tirelessly for the invasion of Iraq against what he perceived as Euro-weenies and leftist conspiracy nuts, and repeatedly made calls to 'stay the course' long after it became obvious that the initial vision of a strong, united, democratic Iraq had become untenable. I don't think that someone who supported the war should have it held over their head for all eternity: we’re all human, and lord knows the propaganda machine was going at full blast. But damn it, Friedman holds himself out as America's premier analyst on the Middle East. He should have known better. I'm glad reality is finally breaking through to him, but I don't think I've worked through my righteous indignation yet.

Maybe in another Friedman.

 

[JohnRM]

It took a while for a lot of us, for different reasons, to understand the gravity of the situation and what has truly transpired during these past few years. Just be grateful that it is finally happening.

 

[JollyRoger]

Maybe in another Friedman.

That's where I'm at. Just give me 6 to 9 more months and I am sure I can maybe avoid derisive laughter when someone asks me to take Friedman seruously.

 

[Cuivienen]

That's where I'm at. Just give me 6 to 9 more months and I am sure I can maybe avoid derisive laughter when someone asks me to take Friedman seruously.

He does have some interesting things to say about economics. It's his foreign policy ideas that are laughable.

 

[Che Guava]

Think I'll take a read through Latitude and Attitudes tonight and have a good chuckle...

 

[Mark1031]

I could rant for hours about Friedman and the failure of the press and the scariness of the herd mentality in people but I will just comment on this:

But damn it, Friedman holds himself out as America's premier analyst on the Middle East.

Now why would anyone accept this notion. He is a glorified blogger (granted with several Pulitzer prizes) but really is he more of an expert than the myriad professors of Middle Eastern studies that must be lurking around the university system. How about the state department, they might have a few. How Friedman or any reporter gets the exaulted status of "expert" is beyond me.

 

[downtown]

...the pulitzer prizes are the difference I think.

 

[Arwon]

I think there's a reasonable case to be made that the United States has become a jittery oversensitive laughing stock that jumps everytime someone says "boo", but Friedman's a bit of a whiner anyway.

 

[Che Guava]

I get the sense that Friedman still understands the middle east quite well...the middle east of the 1980s and 90s....

 

[Mark1031]

...the pulitzer prizes are the difference I think.

Well the Pulitzer criteria is not Middle East expertise. I looked him up and he is more of an "expert" than I thought. He has a masters in ME studies and has written a book that is supposedly used as a textbook. Now he is also listed as an expert in economics and globalization. You just can't be an expert in everything. There are people who have studied the history and culture of the ME and of particular countries in the ME. His opinions on the war were just jingoistic chest thumping with an erudite flare.

 

[luiz]

Friedman was wrong, as indeed were pretty much all of the Iraq War supporters.

But the Iraq fiasco made us all remember how wrong were the proponents of the war, and forget that some opponents were also quite wrong. I mean, before the invasion there were quite alot of folks saying that overthrowing Saddam would be extremely difficult, and now they're claiming to have been right all along. Just like those who said Afghanistan would be a new Vietnam (and there was quite a few). Nowadays they pretend to be right when they were indeed just as wrong as Friedman.

I don't think too many people can boast about having predicted a precise outcome, from the begining of the operation until today.

Furthermore, the main problem with Iraq is not even the outcome, as catastrophic as it was. If there was no WMD, if indeed there was no reliable intel about WMD, than why the hell did the US invade?

 

[BasketCase]

It took a while for a lot of us, for different reasons, to understand the gravity of the situation and what has truly transpired during these past few years. Just be grateful that it is finally happening.

I think this happened a lot sooner than most people realize--within a matter of weeks after 9/11, Jay Leno and other big-name comedians were making jokes about it. Including jokes about anthrax.

Over here, instead of declaring holy war and stewing about it for decades (egads, there's that word again), we turn Jay Leno loose on it.

 

[Japanrocks12]

He isn't saying anything that I already don't know

 

[Pasi Nurminen]

Thomas Friedman is a giant jackass.

 

[Fifty]

I hate various plays on the "pot calling the kettle black" thing so freaking much. I couldn't read past that because it sucked so much. Could you please edit it out so I can continue reading?

 

[Swedishguy]

He isn't saying anything that I already don't know

Er... how can you already not know something? That doesn't make sense.

 

[Che Guava]

Er... how can you already not know something? That doesn't make sense.

It's an english turn of phrase: it means he already knows the things that Friedman is saying. I.E., it's not news...

 

[Arwon]

Word order is wrong though. It's "I don't already know"

 

[Jawz II]

Thomas Friedman is a monkey in a suit. Just my opinion.

the difference between me and him is, I dont pretend to know about things I don't.

 

[Marla_Singer]

But the Iraq fiasco made us all remember how wrong were the proponents of the war, and forget that some opponents were also quite wrong. I mean, before the invasion there were quite alot of folks saying that overthrowing Saddam would be extremely difficult, and now they're claiming to have been right all along.

One must really be silly to consider it would be hard to overthrow Saddam. Already in 1991, the Gulf War has been a piece of cake victory for the allies, so after 12 years of international sanctions and limited military capacities, I really wonder how it could have been considered as "difficult" to overthrow Saddam. To be fully honnest, I was actually even surprized the US army needed a few days to move out of Basrah. I thought it would be faster than that. Anyway, I think that those who over-estimated Saddam's military capacities were in fact much more numerous in the pro-war side.

I will personally always remember that scene when, 2 weeks before getting invaded, the Iraqi military was destroying its very last long-range missiles! I don't believe there are so many other examples in History where a country destroyed its military capacities right before getting invaded! Now this being said, I'm not even sure he could have used them anyway. IIRC correctly, he had still hidden them from the UN and it's only after the UN found them out that he accepted to destroy them. Well, whatever, that's not that important.