As some have pointed out and liberals can't seem to grasp or simply refuse to acknowledge the logic of since such an acknowledgment would cloud their perfect dreams - even if you are right in thinking Bush's move into Iraq the worst foreign policy blunder ever, that would in no way make simply walking away from the problem as if by scorning it so time is reversed and all unpleasantness undone an acceptable response - unless of course as a liberal in your vain self righteousness you've convinced yourself that the dire consequences of inaction pale in comparison to the value of once again pointing out how evil was Bush.
For the uber liberal, the only real dangers out there are conservatives, Wall Street and the military machine that props them up - get rid of all that ugliness and everything will be fine. If the price paid for getting rid of that ugliness is chaos breaking out on several fronts and America's reputation as a reliable ally and superpower in tatters, well... as the old lions of a promised universal socialism used to say, gotta break a few eggs...
Which raises interesting question: what will it mean if Obama doesn't involve himself in what's going on in Iraq because to his way of thinking upending his foreign policy goals to fix a problem he no doubt believes is all the fault of Bush would not serve the greater good, which we would be left to believe is him and his ideas? Given his performance as Commander in Chief to date, it's not inconceivable that he views the practice of foreign policy in such messianic terms.
For the uber liberal, the only real dangers out there are conservatives, Wall Street and the military machine that props them up - get rid of all that ugliness and everything will be fine. If the price paid for getting rid of that ugliness is chaos breaking out on several fronts and America's reputation as a reliable ally and superpower in tatters, well... as the old lions of a promised universal socialism used to say, gotta break a few eggs...
Which raises interesting question: what will it mean if Obama doesn't involve himself in what's going on in Iraq because to his way of thinking upending his foreign policy goals to fix a problem he no doubt believes is all the fault of Bush would not serve the greater good, which we would be left to believe is him and his ideas? Given his performance as Commander in Chief to date, it's not inconceivable that he views the practice of foreign policy in such messianic terms.
