I don't have too much original to say about the Petraus/Crocker testimony yesterday and today. I was able to read summaries and catch the News Hour coverage, but that's it. Unsurprisingly, it seems that horrible horrible things would happen if we left totally for sure, but now we're winning in Iraq and we have to say but no one knows for how long because it's really complicated and who can predict the future (except for if we withdraw of course)?
I did want to link to this by Matt Yglesias. There's just a whole lot of plain sense in that post. There's really just no reason to think that our presence in Iraq is making anything better, or to think things would be better or worse if we simply left. Meanwhile, we're not accomplishing any serious strategic objectives by staying other than accomplishing ... staying. And no one has yet come up with a convincing definition of "win" in the Iraq context.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment