Hitchens looks uncomfortable here. Must have been feeling some kind of chagrin at supporting the invasion. At least US policy makers have learnt something from Iraq; Letting Libyans blow their own country apart to take down Gaddafi was the right choice.
@vicj0r Don't be foolish. The Iraqi's had no chance against Saddam; are you familiar with the 1991 uprisings?
Gaddafi would have also suppressed the revolts against him with sheer force as well had it not been for the military might of the US & NATO. So don't try to represent it as if the Libyans took Gaddafi down on their own to support the idea that we shouldn't have intervened in Iraq.
Very slimy comment if I'm to understand you correctly.
Christopher Hitchens hit the nail on the head with his comments about America's (& others) commitment to that country that was created by Winston Churchill drawing some lines on a map, after WWII.
The debate in America about whether to pull out or not is based on the conception that US lives are more important than Iraqi lives.
If you mean Western lives are more important, then all I can say is at least you're being honest. Unlike many that say 'we've done enough damage' & just pull out. I don't know who they're attempting to protect, besides the willing participants in the war namely the unconscripted troops.
Sometimes I think if the invading countries didn't lose approximately 5,000 troops in Iraq, but over 70,000 Iraqis still died, the war would've never been a political issue in the first place.
Look at EvilGoblin: An ad hominem churning recreant who censors people's comments on his video if someone gives Hitchens the slightest compliment. Vulgar and Pro Galloway is all it is. I remember when a sober Galloway hopped around in a cat suit or leotard and started licking milk from a dish bowl. Hitchens remains classy when he's intoxicated.
Its worse than that. I think we need to be clear that it fits into the abusive subtype of ad hominem argument (which isn't totally worthless per se), on top of which it is badly plagerised, assuming EvilGoblin is not Mr Galloway's online persona. That whole debate was quite pathetic and I'm amazed that Americans respond to his ridiculous rhetoric trawled out at high volumes. On top of that he is a hypocrit and the most morally contemtable man I can thing of.
@AdamCopley1 I'd like to say its not all Americans but as my family is from Italy and I was born and raised in new england I'm hardly representative of the national mood. However I can say that very few Americans would agree that they are the cause of terrorism or that they hold any responsibility for 9-11 beyond the inability to prevent it from happening by means of security.
Most of the arguments against intervention are nationalist and right wing, not of the Galloway/Klein variety.
Good point; Hitch has mentioned in another interview (I forget where, sorry) that it's possible to be in favour of the coalition intervention in Iraq, yet state that it isn't going very well.
I think it may have been the 3 hr CSPAN interview. I think it's important to remember that a poor military execution shouldn't obscure the fact that the intervention was neccessary.
No I think there is some truth to this but this is a statement on perhaps all intellectualising situations. His views, though wrong, are not flabby because he has taken his chosen position very far. It can be done.
This is how intelligent honest people discuss issues. Such exchanges are far to rare.
lafontaine13 1 month ago
Hitchens looks uncomfortable here. Must have been feeling some kind of chagrin at supporting the invasion. At least US policy makers have learnt something from Iraq; Letting Libyans blow their own country apart to take down Gaddafi was the right choice.
vicj0r 4 months ago
@vicj0r Don't be foolish. The Iraqi's had no chance against Saddam; are you familiar with the 1991 uprisings?
Gaddafi would have also suppressed the revolts against him with sheer force as well had it not been for the military might of the US & NATO. So don't try to represent it as if the Libyans took Gaddafi down on their own to support the idea that we shouldn't have intervened in Iraq.
Very slimy comment if I'm to understand you correctly.
Territomauvais 3 months ago
Comment removed
vicj0r 4 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
and your mom cares about licking my ballsack, whats ur point.
hatc9723 4 years ago
you must be talking about someone else's mom... his mom prefers balls that are attached.
SamFreedom 4 years ago 3
Christopher Hitchens hit the nail on the head with his comments about America's (& others) commitment to that country that was created by Winston Churchill drawing some lines on a map, after WWII.
The debate in America about whether to pull out or not is based on the conception that US lives are more important than Iraqi lives.
stanzemanek 4 years ago 22
They are
mcdonalds411 2 years ago
If you mean Western lives are more important, then all I can say is at least you're being honest. Unlike many that say 'we've done enough damage' & just pull out. I don't know who they're attempting to protect, besides the willing participants in the war namely the unconscripted troops.
Sometimes I think if the invading countries didn't lose approximately 5,000 troops in Iraq, but over 70,000 Iraqis still died, the war would've never been a political issue in the first place.
stanzemanek 2 years ago 4
I respect both Jones and Hitchens. A good discussion here. Thanks for the upload.
hunterthompsonfear 4 years ago 10
Look at EvilGoblin: An ad hominem churning recreant who censors people's comments on his video if someone gives Hitchens the slightest compliment. Vulgar and Pro Galloway is all it is. I remember when a sober Galloway hopped around in a cat suit or leotard and started licking milk from a dish bowl. Hitchens remains classy when he's intoxicated.
LeatherSexLeak 4 years ago 7
Its worse than that. I think we need to be clear that it fits into the abusive subtype of ad hominem argument (which isn't totally worthless per se), on top of which it is badly plagerised, assuming EvilGoblin is not Mr Galloway's online persona. That whole debate was quite pathetic and I'm amazed that Americans respond to his ridiculous rhetoric trawled out at high volumes. On top of that he is a hypocrit and the most morally contemtable man I can thing of.
AdamCopley1 4 years ago 4
@AdamCopley1 I'd like to say its not all Americans but as my family is from Italy and I was born and raised in new england I'm hardly representative of the national mood. However I can say that very few Americans would agree that they are the cause of terrorism or that they hold any responsibility for 9-11 beyond the inability to prevent it from happening by means of security.
Most of the arguments against intervention are nationalist and right wing, not of the Galloway/Klein variety.
GaiusIuliusTaberna 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Look at the fat drink soaked popinjay squirm.
EvilGoblin 4 years ago
Evil...you suck
adstanra 4 years ago 3
How do you get EvilGoblin to swallow... THAT'S the question!!! >;-P >:-D
Scrapheap71 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
haha Your account was suspended.
therealtruth123 3 years ago
I think allergy's are troubling him.
sun2515 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Why, I think the old boy is a bit soused.
detectivesyme 4 years ago
thanks dude
desiiii420 4 years ago
One of very few times when hitchens is on Australian TV and i miss it.
Thanks for posting
wezza18625 4 years ago
Hitchens enjoys taking the unpopular position on controversial subjects; he likes the cut and thrust of the debate.
When he talks about Iraq he ends up giving even more reasons for the idea that the whole Iraq project has been a complete disaster.
pdoeman 4 years ago
If he took the opposing position as a matter of choice, his arguments would be thin and easily dismissable, which they are not.
DaveyH123 4 years ago
I think Hitchens gives the perspective that the situation in Iraq would have been disastrously worse. There is a chronology to consider.
nyomythus 4 years ago
Good point; Hitch has mentioned in another interview (I forget where, sorry) that it's possible to be in favour of the coalition intervention in Iraq, yet state that it isn't going very well.
I think it may have been the 3 hr CSPAN interview. I think it's important to remember that a poor military execution shouldn't obscure the fact that the intervention was neccessary.
Good point though.
DcTurner 4 years ago 2
No I think there is some truth to this but this is a statement on perhaps all intellectualising situations. His views, though wrong, are not flabby because he has taken his chosen position very far. It can be done.
carlbumbum 4 years ago
Yes, thankyou for posting. I missed this on Thursday.
BMauriceB 4 years ago
thanks for posting.
aLifeLessMagical 4 years ago