Centerfield

What bothers me the most about all this is that we spend so much time fighting each other that we're not really getting the job done anywhere. Nations don't fall because they're attacked from without, but because they rot from within.

We're really stinking up the place. :\

First. I think it odd that one moment you suggest Obama should be excused from his anti-war policy and the next week we belittle the Democrat’s anti-war strategy in Congress.

Two things. First, media plays politics as anti-war this and anti-war that, but forcing a frank conversation about our military disposition isn't anti-war. Its common sense. And it makes sense as long as there is no apparent counter to advanced weapons and billions of dollars funding extremists that increasingly endanger our forces in Iraq. Civilians have a right to discuss and prevent policies that do damage our readiness, lower morale, and increase global terrorism. There is nothing anti-war about Congress making sure our military is not deploying itself into a strategically vulnerable position creating additional risks to the already tens of thousands of American casualties. There has also been a significant toll on military hardware, reputation and future defense systems. I am not advocating that our effort is in vain or that failure is an option, just distinguishing political partisanship from a reasonable anxiety over the health of our military strategy.

With Iran in the cross hairs, Congress should be asking some tough questions while recognizing the significant opportunities that come next week in Iraq with American blood, at the end of a US gun barrel (well, maybe German).

Second, 2008 will be about the legitimate use of this force. The Jury still will be out as to whether this force should continue its role in diplomacy and terror-eradication (using prevention, pre-emption, intervention and retaliation).

"Electible" fruit still comes from the security tree and history may be kinder on Bush by 2008 (given the opportunities at hand) than the anti-war presently thinks. They were wrong about Reagan.

In the year 2008 (think Conan) will there be a North Korea that is really denuclearizing? Will there be an anxious China heeding the warnings to slow growth and liberalize their justice system? Will their stock rise or fall?

Will Putin's replacement be a clone or more dangerous?

More importantly, will the Sunnis regimes isolate Iran, increase oil production and end an armed conflict with Israel? Remember, China, Russia, the EU and America ALL reject Fundamentalist Islamist extremism. Will Arab leaders wise up and dare to take the Israeli card off the table?

Will Iran then blink and suspend enrichment and consent to a South African style inspection of its MIC and nuclear programs? Will North Korea?

I submit that force has indeed changed the station. We would hardly be close to asking these questions. The results are not in yet. There are always positive and negative consequences from action. I respect sincere efforts to strengthen our tactics, strategies and armed forces. The sad truth is that many Democrats want to keep the anti-war supporter's and be "electible" come November 2007. McCain showed more sincerity last night on Letterman.

I don't think Obama should be excused, I think what he is proposing is wrong. However, I think he is right that the war was stupid to begin with, and he is one of the few who have been right all along. Furthermore, I can disagree with somebody on one issue and still like them, and hey, even vote for them.