Decius wrote:
The problem is that the voting public will never hear a straight answer on that question from anyone, just as they have not heard a straight answer from anyone about anything related to this war.

It doesn't matter. Truth or no truth from the politicians or the media. You have what you have. Call it "going with your gut" if you must, but it's what we can do. I'm not at all confident that leaving entirely is *the* *best* course of action. It's a devils choice, and we're largely fucked either way. It's more important, now, which action sends the best signal to the rest of the world. I hate to say it, but there's no predicting which course will save more lives, or ensure stability, or whatever. Whether there are or are not any "smart people in a box," this administration has systematically dismantled trust in any such group. They've assaulted the notion of intelligence, reason and merit in favor of blind faith, absolutism and false populism. "Experts" are distrusted. That's one of the many things it'll take years to repair in the aftermath of this presidency. So smart counsel gets you nowhere, the media have decided to become entertainers, to the dereliction of their oversight role, and the public is left holding the bloody bag, where we will, and must, go with our gut, or whatever we can reason out of what little truth we do have. It's genuinely academic to me at this point. The Republican contenders for the presidency are all toxic to me. A lot of the Democrats leave me sour, but I'll take lemons over plutonium any day.

Hyperbole from Democrats who will insist that everything in Iraq will be just fine if only we would leave.

I don't think this is the majority opinion at all. I think the Democrats realize that Iraq is fucked, and will remain fucked even if we pull out, but they're going to try to hang that around Bush's neck, and the neck of any Republican (shit, or Democrat) possible. The primary narrative I see is that Iraq is fucked, and Bush is the one who fucked it. Our removal of troops is a conciliation to the reality of no positive outcome in sight. Given no good alternatives, less dead american soldiers is probably best.

Of course, the Right will have you believe that saving the soldiers now will kill civilians later.

This is a belief that I think plays directly into the hands of the terrorists (as so much of the knee-jerk, totalitarian bullshit perpetrated in the past 6 years has). I absolutely believe that our enemies are expecting a pullout, a Democrat president, at which point any successful attack they pull off will completely destroy the country. The Right will beat their breasts as if it could have been prevented, if only the traitorous Left hadn't led us out of Iraq and hamstrung Bush or Bush 2.0. The Left will have no response, and the result will be the end of free America, while Osama laughs away.

I am not optimistic about the future, regardless of what choices are made now. Not one bit.

If politicians actually listened to those kinds of people we wouldn't be in this mess in the first place.

Hear hear, and thanks again to the right for dismantling the public's notion of expertise and encouraging unquestioning partisanship. And thanks to the Left for permitting it. We're in deep shit, friends.

RE: Iraq Debate Prompts Senate Cloakroom Clash, Presidential Hopeful Defends Bush As White House Lobbies GOP Senators - CBS News