OxBlog

# Posted 9:44 PM by Ariel David Adesnik

SULLIVAN VS. MARSHALL: It isn't often that Josh Marshall descends into the trenches of the inter-blog warfare, but it's hard not to respond to a challenge from a blogger like Andrew Sullivan whose stature rests on far more than his website.

For the moment, there is no victor in this clash of the titans. I think Marshall's post deserves a response, despite the fact that it comes close to evading Sullivan's points.

However, if you agree with Josh (Marshall) that "tit-for-tats with other bloggers...get too insidery and readers get bored with them" then ignore the clash and head straight for Marshall's latest posts on Rumsfeld's failure as a military strategist.

Reading these posts, it's hard to know whether Marshall thinks that the current situation is evidence of Rumsfeld's failure, or whether Rumsfeld's failures will be responsible if something goes terribly wrong. IMHO, Marshall is right that Rumsfeld has come close to crossing the line between boldness and hubris. And the US may well have to shift to a more traditional strategy for taking Baghdad. But unless something does go terribly wrong because of Rumsfeld's insistence on overruling the generals, I think Marshall's "hyperbolic" criticism will seem rather excessive in retrospect.

(NB: Even if Marshall is above tit-for-tats, he certainly can't resist the usual blogospheric temptation to play for sympathy by publishing the most offensive criticism his readers send in.)

(0) opinions -- Add your opinion