Taking Iraq was never about terrorism. To argue the war on the basis of terrorism is to score one for the terrorists. Because while we argue, they're doing push-ups.
It's so easy to forget, it bears repeating: Taking Iraq was never about terrorism, never about American security, 9/11, al-Qaeda, Osama bin Laden, or the disruption of future terrorist plots against America.
Iraq is about real estate and spoils. Iraq is NOT about spreading "democracy," unless democracy is defined as "winking capitalism."
Does anyone dispute the enormous disadvantage of our military now that Iraq devolves to civil war? Ironically, it's quite easy to pick out from the crowd a guy in camouflage.
If you want to take a country, you send the military. If you want to defeat a terror cell, you infiltrate and defeat it from within.
The reason America's military is so ineffective is because our president has misunderstood its proper use. Worse, nobody's told him no, which is this is the real crime. The Congress was lied to by the president, who hijacked the military. We marched into Baghdad and took it. Bush declared the war over, then talked of winning the peace, which sounded reasonable to most, but then he needed $87 billion for the first year. And Congress, for God knows what reason, thought they had to make a quick decision. It became a race. In record time, without debate of the consequences, Congress said yes.
Congress made Americans complicit. This is why the "left" is screaming bloody murder now. They should have screamed when Bush was in his flight suit on the boat. But they were distracted by the silly costume and the "Mission Accomplished" sign that Karl Rove recently said he regretted — once again — and reminded us that it was a banner commemorating the boat's 40th mission, a claim that was disproved shortly after he said it the first time.