Neoconservatives and failure

The best article I’ve read so far is the one in Vanity Fair, “Neoculpa” about Neocons and the ways they are dealing with the aftermaths or rather failures of the policies they supported. Vanity Fair had published a preview of the article before the election, which had led Richard Perle, David Frum, and other Neocons interviewed for the article that they had been had. The article is interesting because it shows that sometimes perceptions is just reality and that it is difficult admitting that one’s mistakes especially when they are based on one’s views of the world. Money quote:

Fearing that worse is still to come, Adelman believes that neoconservatism itself—what he defines as "the idea of a tough foreign policy on behalf of morality, the idea of using our power for moral good in the world"—is dead, at least for a generation. After Iraq, he says, "it's not going to sell." And if he, too, had his time over, Adelman says, "I would write an article that would be skeptical over whether there would be a performance that would be good enough to implement our policy. The policy can be absolutely right, and noble, beneficial, but if you can't execute it, it's useless, just useless. I guess that's what I would have said: that Bush's arguments are absolutely right, but you know what? You just have to put them in the drawer marked CAN'T DO. And that's very different from LET'S GO."

I wish Neoconservatism was dead, but something tells me that it is still in the coma and that its proponents will always be able to argue that they had the right ideas, but that they didn’t have the right people to implement them.