Over a hundred thousand dead and millions displaced and still Michael Novak is defending the Iraq War. Sticking to his guns, I guess. Here’s a tip: if you launch into a moral defense of a war without reckoning with the dead, the displaced, and all the other terrible consequences of that war, you’re doing it wrong.
Maybe he plans to get to that in part two.
And let’s be clear here: Novak isn’t arguing merely that those who advanced the cause of war were well meaning and doing the best they could with what they had. The ground he defends is that ” it was right and good for the allied coalition to liberate Iraq in 2003.”
As if that’s what actually happened.
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In