It is time for the United States to leave Iraq, without any more delay than the Pentagon needs to organize an orderly exit.Which I could understand, except for what follows:
Americans must be clear that Iraq, and the region around it, could be even bloodier and more chaotic after Americans leave. There could be reprisals against those who worked with American forces, further ethnic cleansing, even genocide. Potentially destabilizing refugee flows could hit Jordan and Syria. Iran and Turkey could be tempted to make power grabs. Perhaps most important, the invasion has created a new stronghold from which terrorist activity could proliferate.So, the return of The Killing Fields and a show of weakness that will draw the vultures to us --that's the official editorial position of the Gray Lady. I note too that she foresees precisely what the President foresees if we accept defeat --yet when he says it, it's demagoguery and fear-mongering, and when she says it it's realism. Apparently the difference between lying and telling the truth about the war isn't facts, but the outcome you're prepared to accept. Annotated fisking here.
This is useful, however, because the American people do need to take a hard look at what they want. Now the call for surrender has been sounded, it's more than an accusation from the President. Let every presidential candidate be asked if he or she agrees with the New York Times.
