Glenn Reynolds feels the need – again – to point out something really, really important:
In Iraq, Obama took a war that we had won at a considerable expense in lives and treasure, and threw it away for the callowest of political reasons. In Syria and Libya, he involved us in wars of choice without Congressional authorization, and proceeded to hand victories to the Islamists. Obama’s policy here has been a debacle of the first order, and the press wants to talk about Bush as a way of protecting him. Whenever you see anyone in the media bringing up 2003, you will know that they are serving as palace guard, not as press.
If that sounds kind of familiar, it’s because I keep saying pretty much the same thing. Because both Glenn and I know that we need to make this clear. There’s a difference between not getting everything that you want, and presiding over a debacle; and this administration is currently providing for us a stark example of the latter.
Of course, this assumes this debacle isn’t what he wants…
“Mikey, if you had to go back to your vote to invade Iraq, would you vote the same way?”
“That’s a great question; I suppose I would have to take into consideration that if the war wasn’t won within three months the Democrats would renounce their support and then treacherously do everything to undermine the war effort by providing all of the aid and comfort to our enemies that they could do up to the Constitutional treason line, with a few honorable exceptions such as Joseph Lieberman that the Democrats turned on and savaged like the amoral creatures they actually are.”
“And while I’m being given the luxury of time travel with 20/20 hindsight, let me further add that I would stop the 9/11 plot, the Boston Marathon bombing, the bombing of the USS Cole, the first WTC bombing, the invasion of Kuwait, and oh, while I’m at it, I might as well order the fleet out of Pearl Harbor on Dec 7 1941.”