"Hey, Salam? Fuck you."

That puts a rather more hostile spin on Lilek's essay, and explains why a lot of Matt's commenters (including me) think Lileks is WAAAY overboard here.

Not to mention the idea that Iraqis are disgusting cowards for not resisting is absurd. Try the same argument on for size about concentration camps or confederate slaves and see how it feels.

I skipped the invective because I'm trying to maintain a cleaner tone here. I think Lilek's reaction is perfectly justified, though.

I haven't gone that deeply into the social history of those eras, but I don't recall the Jews who were liberated from the concentration camps complaining very much. And many of the slaves actually picked up a rifle and joined the Union army when they had a chance.

Geesh.

That's why i liked the Lileks's post. Salam wasn't offering a serious critique or advice, he was playing to his audience in England and going for cheap jokes.

What I actually said was, "Not to mention the idea that Iraqis are disgusting cowards for not resisting is absurd. Try the same argument on for size about concentration camps or confederate slaves and see how it feels."

IF you think the Iraqis were cowards for not resisting Saddam, as Lileks does, do you think that Jews in concentration camps and slaves in the Confederate South who did not resist overwhelming force arrayed against hem were also cowards?

Ah. Not really, but it's a matter of degrees. Clearly, there were slaves and internees who resisted despite the overwhelming odds; they were particularly heroic. On the other end of the spectrum, there were some who did anything they could to ingratiate themselves with their captors, including spying on their fellows; they were despicable cowards. Most were somewhere in between.

But, unless Lileks is calling himself a coward--he says he'd have done the same thing Salam did--then that's not his argument. I certainly don't blame Salam for trying to hide out until it all passed over; I do feel a bit of outrage over his snarkiness directed toward those who put their lives on the line and secured his freedom.

Fair enough. I'm sure people can feel embittered by the comparative courage of others. But, surely, it's permissible for the target of the sneering to resent being sneered at?

"He died doing what you never had the stones to do"

Sure sounds to me like Lileks calling Salaam a coward.

JC's right. Drezner's right on.

I think he's saying Salam isn't as brave as the soldiers he's, by extension at least, sneering at. But, again, he says he wouldn't have done it either.

James Lileks is writing his blog with his opinion in mind. Is it flawed? Sure, all of our opinions are. Is it wrong, though? Not really. His point is summarized there at the end, "be a grown up". It's semantics to argue what his intention was or to try and infer his meaning. Look only at the words he writes and watch for the way he writes them. His whole article is merely a heated response to a growing trend: complaining that you're not seeing that new Iraqi McDonald's built fast enough. He wants Salam and all of those with Salam's penchant for whining to put up or shut up.

That's my two cents anyway.I'm busy covering the President's newest 'religion of peace' comments.

http://www.gabeposey.com/thescrawl.com