Slow Burn (Slate Podcasts)

Season 5: The Road to the Iraq War

Episode 4: Fighting Words

Release date: May 12, 2021

Overview

This episode of Slow Burn delves into the complex intellectual and cultural forces that drove America toward the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Host Noreen Malone examines how pro-war arguments dominated elite circles in Washington, media, and the burgeoning world of blogs—bringing together strange political bedfellows and creating a consensus that overwhelmed dissent. Through interviews, archival audio, and reflections by key players, the episode raises thorny questions about the responsibility of public intellectuals and writers for one of America’s most consequential foreign policy decisions.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Christopher Hitchens: From Outsider to Insider

• Early Career & Contrarian Stance:
  Hitchens, long known for iconoclasm and anti-establishment views, surprises many by openly supporting the Iraq war after 9/11—even as most of the Left opposed it.
  • "If Princess Diana had trodden on a landmine, which I think would have been a very fine way for her to go, then we could say in a sense her life and death had had some meaning." —Christopher Hitchens (00:37)
• Transformation after 9/11:
  Hitchens embraces the "battle with Muslim fundamentalism" (01:59); his support for deposing Saddam Hussein aligns him with neoconservatives and Bush administration intellectuals.
• Connection with the Neocons:
  A behind-the-scenes tale describes Hitchens’ burgeoning friendship and intellectual rapport with Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, culminating in an energetic private lunch at the Pentagon.
  • "The conversation was so fast and lively that they were literally ending each other's sentences." —Kevin Kellums, Wolfowitz's aide (04:01)
• Role in Shaping Elite Opinion:
  Hitchens’ writing—first at The Nation, then Slate—gives left-leaning audiences a compelling moral justification for intervention in Iraq.
  • "I think he probably had a substantial influence in giving people who thought of themselves as lefties an excuse to be for the war." —Mark Danner (07:06)
• Cult of Personality:
  Hitchens’ charisma and hosting of lively, argument-filled salons in DC draw together neocons, liberal hawks, and cultural figures, creating a fertile ground for war-supportive debate.
  • "He brought a kind of swashbuckling character to opinion journalism that it doesn't usually have." —Katha Pollitt (07:17)
  • "I remember sitting there one evening and Paul Wolfowitz was at the same table as Salman Rushdie...talking about the New York Mets." —Frank Foer (09:19–09:22)

2. The Rise of Neoconservatism and Liberal Hawks

• Neoconservative Vision:
  After the Cold War, neocon thinkers like Paul Wolfowitz and Bill Kristol promote an assertive American foreign policy—to preclude rivals and spread democracy.
  • "After the Cold War, they believed that the United States should play a very active role in the world...on behalf of democracy and against dictatorships." —James Mann (12:16)
  • The "Wolfowitz Doctrine" envisions pre-emptively suppressing threats, especially from states like Iraq (13:26–13:49)
• Influence through Media:
  Neocon voices find platforms in the Weekly Standard (underwritten by Rupert Murdoch), influencing top policy circles:
  • "Dick Cheney's office alone ordered 30 copies every week." (15:30)
  • Neocons, described as "Iraq invasion hipsters," publish "Saddam Must Go" years before the mainstream. (15:55)
• Democrats: The Liberal Hawks:
  Not just neocons—center-left intellectuals join the chorus, including Thomas Friedman, Bill Keller, David Remnick, Peter Beinart, and Fareed Zakaria.
  • "I lean in favor of doing something, but only if we can do it right, because I do believe Saddam Hussein is a really bad guy." —Thomas Friedman (18:00)
• Emotional and Psychological Drivers:
  For some liberals, supporting intervention is driven by a desire to shake off the "weak-kneed" stigma lingering from Vietnam, and a belief in humanitarian responsibility following Rwanda and the Balkans.
  • "There was a backlash against liberalism...the neocons accused the liberal intellectuals of being feeble...so you say I'm weak-kneed. Well, hell, I'm willing to...invade this country." —Frank Foer (20:52)

3. Humanitarian Interventionism & Exile Bias

• Role of Iraqi Exiles:
  Figures like Kanan Makiya provide a moral and humanitarian rationale, arguing that the US can and should help liberate oppressed Iraqis.
  • “Still in Iraq, most people live in a twilight zone. They follow orders blindly...Evil of this kind, on this scale.” —Kanan Makiya (22:56)
  • Makiya famously predicts US troops will be greeted “with sweets and flowers,” arguing that "Even if there was a less than 5% chance of success, I would be morally bound to fight for it." (25:08)
• Exile Limitations:
  Many exiles, like Ahmed Chalabi and Makiya, are more westernized and liberal than Iraq’s average citizens—potentially skewing American perceptions of Iraqi desires and readiness for democracy.
  • "Call it exile bias...they gave the impression everyone in Iraq wanted what they wanted." (25:44)

4. The Role of Blogs and New Media

• A New Intellectual Battleground:
  The rise of blogs (e.g., Instapundit, Andrew Sullivan for war; Talking Points Memo against) democratizes opinion, speeds up debate, and injects a more combative, performative tone.
  • "People craved opinion, even from writers who had no particular expertise about Iraq." (27:58)
  • "Let me start a self-published website in which I tell you what to think about things is like the most 20something white guy thing that...I can imagine in the world." —Matt Yglesias (29:12)
• Blogs Gain Real Influence:
  Online arguments about Iraq are increasingly cited by traditional media—accelerating the pro-war consensus among intellectual elites.

5. Dissent, Public Sentiment, and Post-9/11 Culture

• Marginalization of Antiwar Voices:
  Opponents of the war, such as Mark Danner and Katha Pollitt, are overwhelmed by the consensus among elite and media circles—even as millions protest worldwide.
  • "He does not threaten the United States...he's within his box. His army and military is decaying and this is a trumped-up threat." —Mark Danner (30:51)
• Hyper-Patriotism and Islamophobia:
  The episode discusses a climate of flag-waving and suspicion towards Arab Americans and Muslims post-9/11, reinforced by government policy (Patriot Act) and political rhetoric.
  • "People who look like me and my family members were public enemy number one." —Khaled Beydoun (33:18)
  • President Bush creates “a good vs. bad Muslim binary” (33:39)
• Violent Binary Framing:
  Even liberal interventionists are swept into a “with us or against us” logic.
  • "What they needed to see was American boys and girls going house to house from Basra to Baghdad...Well, suck on this." —Thomas Friedman (34:59)

6. Elite Consensus: Bubble or Driver?

• The Circles of Power:
  The episode recounts a book launch party at the Metropolitan Club in DC, full of war’s elite intellectual boosters—where even as an invasion looms, “moral seriousness” tempers the earlier bravado.
  • "...Delivering these remarks that were kind of strikingly gloomy...It was slightly dissonant because so many of the intellectuals had described the Iraq war as a cakewalk." —Frank Foer (36:50)
• Did Intellectuals Matter?
  Foer speculates that if liberal outlets had opposed the war, the invasion might have been framed as more partisan, perhaps even been less likely.
  • "...Maybe the war would have been more of a partisan issue if liberal intelligentsia had gone the other way." —Frank Foer (37:33)

7. Aftermath and Reckoning

• Rapid Disillusion & Retrospective Regret:
  Within a year, many liberal hawks publicly regret their positions, but notably, Hitchens does not:
  • "Slate had invited a group of writers who had supported the Iraq war to answer the question, why did we get it wrong? Hitchens was the only one whose answer began, I didn’t." (10:16)
• The Career Effects of Being Right or Wrong:
  Those who supported the war see their careers flourish, while many who opposed it are sidelined.
  • "All the people that were wrong about the war, like Michael Ignatieff...went on to great glory. And all the people that were against it did not go on to great glory." —Katha Pollitt (41:06)
• Personal Consequences:
  Some, like Lawrence Kaplan, become deeply disillusioned and leave journalism altogether after witnessing the war’s effects firsthand.
• Reflection on Reason & Emotion:
  The episode closes by questioning the limits of reasoned argument in moments of national trauma:
  • "...If you're an intellectual, your job is to reason your way to the best argument. But 9/11 provoked an incredibly strong emotional response...it's embarrassing to see how we surrender to emotion, to unreason, to prejudices." —Frank Foer (40:13–40:56)

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Hitchens’ Contrarian Persona:
  "He brought a kind of swashbuckling character to opinion journalism that it doesn't usually have." —Katha Pollitt (07:17)

• On Elite Rationalization:
  "But even revisiting it that way reduces a war that destroyed millions of lives to a dinner party debate topic, which was part of the problem." —Noreen Malone (39:35)

• On Intellectual Accountability:
  "You helped promote a situation that resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people and the destruction of a society and wider war. Now you're saying it was just sort of a detail because your impulses were good. Come on." —Katha Pollitt (41:23)

• On Blogging Culture:
  "Let me start a self-published website in which I tell you what to think about things is like the most 20something white guy thing that...I can imagine." —Matt Yglesias (29:12)

Timestamps for Key Segments

• Christopher Hitchens’ Radical Shift and Influence: 00:18–07:56
• Neoconservative & Liberal Hawk Intellectual Consensus: 11:40–21:42
• Humanitarian Arguments and Exile Voices (Kanan Makiya): 22:26–25:44
• Bloggers and the New Media Landscape: 26:30–29:12
• Antiwar Marginalization and the Post-9/11 Climate: 30:51–34:18
• Elite Book Party and Reflection on Accountability: 35:44–41:49

Episode Tone & Style

The episode maintains a reflective, critical, and sometimes sardonic tone, especially when weighing the moral certainties of intellectuals against the war’s human toll. Personal voices (like Pollitt, Danner, Foer, and Yglesias) preserve the original candor, regret, and rueful humor that characterized this fraught era in American debate.