Now that's a debate!

Posted By Daniel W. Drezner Tuesday, October 14, 2008 - 3:22 PM Share

Ther general consensus is that the presidential debates have sucked eggs. Of course, this leads to an interesting question: what would a good debate look like? Ladies and gentleman, I give you Eric Alterman and Christopher Hitchens debating Iraq on bloggingheads.tv. Bear in mind, these two are actually going to vote for the same guy in November -- but it doesn't affect their clash on Iraq:

Do out the whole diavlog.

EXPLORE:CULTURE, POLITICS, BLOGGINGHEADS, DEBATE

(8)

HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE

SLEEPYIRV

6:07 PM ET

October 14, 2008

Do I really want to watch

Do I really want to watch Christopher Hithcens? That can't be healthy.

DR JONES

6:07 PM ET

October 14, 2008

Oh, how exciting. Two elite

Oh, how exciting. Two elite approved douchebags differing on Iraq! But both supporting the O - so it's OK to associate yourself with their differences!

[The O. Doesn't that sound like some sexual stimulation device or something? But I digress. And no, let's not bring up the acronym BO, please!]

Again, Dan, I'm interested. You're a smart man, accomplished, you've got tenure (so job security, nothing to lose), you claim you became a Republican during the Reagan years. So: what's the last time you voted for a Republican? Would you still have voted for Reagan if you could go back in time?

Obama is easily the most liberal presidential candidate since McGovern and our host Dan Drezner claims to be a Republican in supporting him. Sure...

ARTHUR

7:12 PM ET

October 14, 2008

Dr Jones, I'd be curious to

Dr Jones, I'd be curious to hear your response to this:

http://www.slate.com/id/2202163/

ERIC (THE ECON DUNCE)

8:36 PM ET

October 14, 2008

Seriously, Does anyone

Seriously,

Does anyone really care that much about Iraq now? I have a feeling no matter who wins we'll say "Glad the Surge worked great, gotta run."

OMG. It's like SOoooo 2007 to care about Iraq.

Y81

10:30 PM ET

October 14, 2008

This reminds me of when I was

This reminds me of when I was at Yale; some guidebook described the econ department as containing "every possible shade of Keynesianism." Similarly, a debate between two liberal Democrats would be kind of Prof. Drezner's ideal.

BRETT

11:17 PM ET

October 14, 2008

It was fairly interesting,

It was fairly interesting, although some of what Hitchens said is wrong and/or exaggerated. The "CIA never predicted the fall of the Soviet Union" is greatly exaggerated (this is straight from Robert Gates, who was the CIA head man under George H.W. Bush), and the "Saddam is clearly irrational" is probably exaggerated as well. Saddam may have been impulsive at times, but he had a very keen sense of his own survival; he built up a regime to protect himself, and his invasion of Iran happened because he thought that he could take advantage of the instability in Iran's new regime to seize Iranian oil fields.

MARK BUEHNER

5:19 AM ET

October 15, 2008

Counterfactuals are always

Counterfactuals are always problematic. I prefer inevitabilities. Hussein would have died, and there would have been some different Iraq after his death. Hitchens has always made that valuable point- Iraq was never a sustainable, containable problem. There is an argument to be made that our involvement in Iraq was ultimately inevitable. Once Hussein died, its probable that the chaos resulting in his sons grasping for power while the ethnic tensions we now know so well sprang open, combined with the greedy neighbors would have led to a blood bath and land grab we couldnt possibly ignore with troops close at hand on containment duty.

I think Alterman's self-congratulations were indeed unfounded. Simply arguing for status quo and then assuming all your happy results is unserious. As an arguing platform it has the nice little feature of not being responsible for your inaction. Simply arguing in reaction to what Bush or the neo-cons propose is not the same as a systematic, deliberate, strategic foriegn policy. And one IS left responsible for inaction just as much as action (ahem, Rwanda, etc).

PETTY BOOZWHA

7:22 AM ET

October 16, 2008

Late to the party but I agree

Late to the party but I agree this was the best debate I've seen in awhile. I also disagree with Brett who thinks Saddam was a rational actor -- his entire career manifested all the attributes of a Fuerer complex, and I, personally, have very little doubt he would have tried again to fulfill what he saw as his world historical mission; to redraw the map of the region by turning Tel Aviv into another Auschwitz, as he promised in Gulf War I.