Hair-Splitting Secularists

Christopher Hitchens, as usual, cuts to the chase on the "hair-splitting secularists who cannot accept that al-Qaida in Mesopotamia is a branch of al-Qaida itself":

To say that the attempt to Talibanize Iraq would not be happening at all if coalition forces were not present is to make two unsafe assumptions and one possibly suicidal one. The first assumption is that the vultures would never have gathered to feast on the decaying cadaver of the Saddamist state, a state that was in a process of implosion well before 2003. All our experience of countries like Somalia and Sudan, and indeed of Afghanistan, argues that such an assumption is idiotic. It is in the absence of international attention that such nightmarish abnormalities flourish. The second assumption is that the harder we fight them, the more such cancers metastasize. This appears to be contradicted by all the experience of Iraq. Fallujah or Baqubah might already have become the centers of an ultra-Taliban ministate, as they at one time threatened to do, whereas now not only have thousands of AQM goons been killed but local opinion appears to have shifted decisively against them and their methods.

I'll let you read on for the third , possibly suicidal one. (Illinois "Reason", this one's for you. Note: Slate is a left-leaning site. As far as Iran, I refer you to this, this and this.)

Related posts: War Crimes of the Dem Left, Tricky Dick in Iraq