Tom Friedman says ‘In or Out’ while Stephen Biddle says ‘Go Deep or Get Out’. It’s strange to see two different people make the same argument on the same day…one in the New York Times and one in the Washington Post. They agree that it makes no sense to stay in Iraq with less troops. Either we ramp it up, or we should completely bug out. No half measures. No compromise solutions. It’s true that Friedman makes an exception for Kurdistan (and I tentatively agree), but they both are adamant that we not stick around with some half-ass plan to train Iraqi troops or hunt terrorists.
I’m glad they are making that point. I think Biddle put it best.
Moderation and centrism are normally the right instincts in American politics, and many lawmakers in both parties desperately want to find a workable middle ground on Iraq. But while the politics are right, the military logic is not.
I saw Sen. Mark Pryor on the Senate floor today pleading with his colleagues to not take party-line votes on an issue as important as Iraq. He wanted them to embrace Sen. Salazar’s mealy-mouthed do-nothing compromise amendment. It’s a nice sentiment, but it isn’t happening and it shouldn’t happen. One side in this debate mist win and win decisively.
