From Marshall Wittmann’s Bull Moose blog:
Some opponents of the war are smugly chortling that “we told you so.” Perhaps. But, these opponents do not necessarily occupy the strategic nor moral high ground. Do they really think that any post-9/11 President would allow Saddam to continue to taunt the West with the possibility of WMD? Do they believe that the realist notion of stability in the Middle East is a solution? And would Iraq and the world really be better with a brutal tyrant still ruling over a country of rape rooms, mass graves and children’s prisons? Do these war opponents really long for the “good old days” of Saddam’s lovely Mesopotamian paradise that posed no earthly threat to the region? Is it possible that Iraq will be lost? Of course it is. And it will be much more likely that it will be lost if America leaves precipitously. Then, the supporters of an early withdrawal will have to address the consequences of both an American defeat and that our international Jihadist enemy will be emboldened. Anti-war Democrats increasingly only see a political up-side in advocating a redeployment, a phased withdrawal, an immediate withdrawal or whatever else they want to call it. History should inform these anti-warriors that Democrats have spent the past three decades attempting to overcome the perception that they are the party of weakness. Whatever short-term gains that they will achieve with their opposition to the war will soon be overtaken by the perception that Democrats are the party of “cut and run.” There is no easy answer to our current predicament. But, defeat is certain if we abandon Iraq. And then, we would reap the whirlwind.
