Well. I guess we now know why it was suddenly important to ask all the Republican candidates whether they would have gone into to Iraq, knowing now what we knew then. It was done apparently to distract from the fact that the current Democratic President is still busy losing the war that the Republican President won for him: “Islamic State fighters took control of key sites in heart of Ramadi, capital of Iraq’s largest province, Iraqi officials said Friday, in what appeared to mark a significant blow to a U.S.-backed military campaign to retake territory from the militants.” Ramadi, for those unfamiliar with the area, is about as far away from Baghdad as Trenton, NJ is from New York City. So this is, as they say, bad. Hopefully it’s still salvageable, but it’s still pretty bad.
As to the question being asked our Republican candidates… why, sure, if I knew in 2003 what I know now I’d still support going into Iraq. I’d also support bribing a couple of school clerical staff to give me copies of a certain obscure Illinois state senator’s college transcripts so that I could make sure that his 2004 Senate bid got derailed before it started. Since I’ve got the poisoned luxury of time travel, and all that… I might as well do my part to help stop the reestablishment of ritual human sacrifice and the slave trade in the Fertile Crescent. Maybe Hillary Clinton would have had better sense… because God knows she’d be unlikely to have worse.
Moe Lane (crosspost)
PS: George W Bush turned rape rooms into polling stations. Barack Obama allowed polling stations to be made into sacrificial altars. Do not expect me to pretend that there is no moral distinction to be made between the two men. Or that Barack Obama comes off as the better human being.