Staying in Iraq

Columbia Daily Tribune

At a time when public opinion turns against the war in Iraq and its presidential sponsor, Congress and other political observers want more definitive plans for U.S. military withdrawal.

Yet all but the most marginal doves stop short of insisting on learning just when and how quickly withdrawal should occur. When their opposition to President George W. Bush & Co. is parsed, it seems, actually, a call for leaving when the job is done, meaning when official Iraqi forces are able to govern and secure the nation without U.S. military help. This has been the Bush policy all along, better stated than executed.

We should not "cut and run." Maybe most of us would like to be able to cut, but I daresay we recognize why that would be a bad move. ...

Rather than discussing timetables, Sens. John McCain and Chuck Hagel say America should send more troops as needed to defeat the insurgency and put the local government firmly in charge. This is not one of today's mainstream arguments, but who is to say it is wrong? ... Doing what McCain and Hagel suggest not only would break the stalemate in Iraq; I'll bet it would quiet the pull-out-now crowd as well. Nothing damages the credibility of supposedly strong leaders like a nonpolicy of drift. ...

Let's finish the job in Iraq, then we can have a meaningful national debriefing.

We can't do this productively in the midst of the fray.