Reid on War?

Last week, Senator Harry Reid stated that the U.S. had "lost" the war in Iraq. This week Mr. Reid sees fit to criticize President Bush for his unwavering stance on the war. He sees this as a weakness that the new Congress needs to address by showing Mr. Bush "the way" to change the war in Iraq.

I'm not sure what Mr. Reid is thinking. Why "change" anything about running the war since he has declared it lost? The real goal is to pull troops out as quickly as possibly regardless of the impact in Iraq and the Middle East. Welcome to Cut and Run-- the most consistent liberal war philosophy since Vietnam. If we can't win a war quickly and with few casualties, Democrats want to run as far and as fast as they can.

No one likes war. But sometimes it is the only defensive recourse in an imperfect world.

We went to war because we thought Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Since huge caches of WMDs weren't discovered, we have heard repeatedly that this was an unjust war. But just as in WWII, our knowledge of Hitler's atrocities were not fully realized until Allies began liberating concentration camps. What of Hussein's mass graves and the human cost before the war? Yes, this war hasn't been as neat as liberals would like but we can't cut and run now. To do so would leave a leadership vacuum in Iraq which would quickly fill with the strongest-- not necessarily the best for Iraq and the stability of the Middle East.