The (Ex) Washington Realist

My guess is we leave Iraq with the women veiled and at the bottom of the heap rather than use U.S. power to force any sort of transformation. This will then be added to the list of betrayals by the liberal wing of the Democratic party.
 

Nick, I think John Randolph's comment about the importance of limits from the same debate on intervention is just as important, but a lot harder for liberals and progressives to accept. Randolph said that intervening to help the Greeks established a precedent that meant intervening anywhere at any time, because it pulled down all barriers to action. Randolph is not in the pantheon as the Adams family is, but he really deserves more attention than he gets
 

How is the MSM going to spin things in Iraq come January? Will the bad news dry up?
 

"The pressure to use American power to "do good" runs right up against the realities of the economic crisis."

Our decision to leave Iraq has been made for diplomatic reasons. If the situation there suddenly deteriorates, I think we will leave because there is no point in spending more money and lives, not because we can't afford to do so.

How long we stay in Afghanistan will depend on the prospects for Afghan self-reliance; if the Afghans make progress in a finite timeframe, I would be surprised if cost prevents us from assisting. What I don't think we will do is embark on new or wider wars or continue open-ended commitments.

"Moreover, the president-elect's wish to begin a withdrawal from Iraq depends on the security provided by groups whose views on a variety of issues--including women's rights--run counter to American preferences."

Were the rights of women one of the objections raised by important groups to the constitution?
 

"Afghanistan" from Persian: "A"+"Fghan"+"Ostan" - Place of Wailing.

Best is to have that unfortunate country partitioned among her neighbours; she does not have the capacity any longer for self-reliance.