"George Z. Bush" wrote:

Stephen Harding wrote:
Surely you won't deny that being bogged down in Iraq is good for Democratic
Presidential hopes next year especially if the economy keeps moving towards
improvement (another "dang!" from the Dems although not explicitly stated).

Certainly I'll categorically deny that being bogged down in Iraq is good for any
American, candidate or not. Many Americans, lately including members of the

Then I don't think you're being politically realistic.

While I don't believe our Senators and Representatives *want* more US casualties
to help attain their political goals, the parties most certainly do make plans
based on how certain issues/problems play out. Dems will be favored if Iraq
is seen as a "quagmire", just as they'll be helped if the economy stays stale.

Republican Party as well as Democrats, are starting to regret that our nation
allowed itself to get involved in this military adventure for non-existent
reasons in the first place. In hindsight, we may someday conclude that we would
have been better off letting the UN handle the mess their way, instead of going
it alone.

In hindsight, when car bombs are exploding along NYC or DC streets on a fairly
regular basis, we'll see the Iraqi effort was cheap compared to having it all
happen at home.

We'll see very clearly the lesson of dropping the ball in Iraq because it "wasn't
worth it" was extremely short sighted.

The terrorists will learn that OBL was right! Americans are paper tigers without
the will to see difficult objectives through to their completion. Car bombs
worked in Lebanon. They worked in Mogadishu. They worked in Iraq. They'll
work anywhere against US interests, and they'll even work in NYC and LA.

This all won't come to pass the day after we depart Iraq in defeat, but I
believe it will come.


SMH