Megan threw a party at the short bus stop
By Thoreau
Megan McArdle has at least half of a decent point: You often learn more from failure than from success, so maybe it does make a certain amount of sense to ask people to examine what they got wrong. But (1) she’s wrong to dismiss the value of “What I got right” retrospectives” and (2) so much of the “What I got wrong?” stuff shows only superficial learning: They keep saying that they were wrong to think that this particular administration could accomplish anything with this particular plan. The bigger reasons for the unworkability do not enter the dimmest recesses of their minds.
But her commenters don’t even have half of a decent point. They’re busy crowing that it was obviously a success because Saddam is gone, even if the chaos in the aftermath has not been managed as well as it might have been. I’d like to take the liberty of fixing one of the comments: (my additions in bold face)
I don’t see how we could possibly have concluded that
removing Saddaminsert any government program here would make the world other than a better place. Certainly thechaos after his removalunintended but predictable consequences was not dealt with effectively, but the fact remains that tens of millions more Iraqis now have different but not better future prospects than the ones who had a certain future under Hussein — primarily his even more murderous sons Uday and Qusay.
There you go. I don’t expect you to appreciate it, because just like Jim Henley my IQ is at least 100 points higher than yours, but I’m going to do you the favor of editing despite your lack of gratitude.
Comment by Jackmormon —
March 24, 2008 @ 10:22 pm
Christ, if I hear that Uday and Qusay talking point *one more time* I swear I’ll blow a gasket. Either one of their taking power was one of the least likely outcomes for Iraq.
Comment by Happy Jack —
March 24, 2008 @ 10:35 pm
Baghdad is certainly a better place. All those gated communities remind me of Hilton Head. Do they have an eighteen-hole course at the new embassy?
As I’m typing this, Michael O’Handjob is gibbering away on C-SPAN. As they pan the audience, I spot Wolfowitz. What cruel fate has befallen him since his demise at the World Bank? Any lessons to be learned?
Comment by Noumenon —
March 24, 2008 @ 11:26 pm
Jackmormon, I tried Googling “qusay uday succeed saddam” but that gives a BBC article that says they were going to succeed Saddam. Maybe you remember where you learned it different?
Comment by bryan —
March 25, 2008 @ 7:58 am
I agree that one learns more from failure than success, but there is also a point when you shouldn’t be testing the failures because the results should appear evident to anyone whose capacity for reason is not extremely limited. For example, if you’re in your thirties and putting your hand in the fire on the grounds that you will learn more from failure than success (failure being a burned hand and disfigurement for life, success being not) then you are not actually in the process of learning anymore. In such a situation you’re just an idiot.
Comment by Barry —
March 25, 2008 @ 10:31 am
“Megan McArdle has at least half of a decent point: ”
Stop right there – you’ve falled into the trap of giving any credit at all to a proven dishonest person.
Comment by Johnathan Pearce —
March 27, 2008 @ 1:18 pm
I think opponents of the war might be a little less obnoxious if they could at least, for a nano-second, admit that the removal of a lying, brutal thug of a ruler (Saddam), was a good thing.
Comment by Kip W —
March 27, 2008 @ 6:29 pm
USA! Still 11% Better Than Saddam!!