Michael O'Hanlon championing his own brilliance in supporting the War Without End:
The Democratic position — embraced particularly by Sen. Barack Obama but also by Sen. Hillary Clinton — is that we need to make haste for the exits. Obama rigidly calls for pulling nearly all combat forces out of Iraq within about a year of Inauguration Day. Clinton’s position leaves room for some flexibility, though her words on the campaign trail are generally similar to Obama’s. But neither candidate’s approach would be supported by most leaders — American or Iraqi — on the ground in Iraq.
That's because there are no American commanders on the ground who don't know that their commands are contingent upon saying what President Bush wants to hear. He's fired and replaced everybody who didn't get that memo.
Oh, and the Iraqi commanders?
O'Hanlon goes on:
Only those who have concluded that the war is already lost tend to back such a position. And that latter viewpoint is far less common today than it was a year ago, or even months ago.
Far less common? Ain't what the polls show, is it? Let me clarify. O'Hanlon is refering to the only people who matter to him, thumbsucking war hawks like himself for whom the War Without End is only an intellectual exercise in proving to themselves and each other how smart and tough they are.
Updating to note that the War Without End may yet expand: Got the heads up from Ken Muldrew. Admiral Wiliam Fallon is "resigning." Fallon was our top military commander in the Middle East and he apparently thought expanding the Wat Without End to Iran might not be such a hot idea right now. Bye-bye, Admiral. Sean-Paul has more here.
Imperial update: In case you didn't know it already, Fallon is no dove. In fact, he's the kind of military man the Bush Leaguers ought to love.