Dem Hawks were wrong about Iraq, and have some explaining to do.

[Classical_Liberal]

Liberal Hawks: Flying in Neocon Circles

by Tom Barry

In the heat of Iraq the neoconservatives are seeing their visions of Pax Americana turn into nightmares and headaches. But they are not alone. Liberal hawks like Ivo Daalder, Robert Kerrey, and Will Marshall also find themselves discredited as the quagmire in Iraq swallows up all their arguments supporting the invasion and occupation.

Without the support of the liberals, President George W. Bush's plan to invade and occupy Iraq may have foundered in Congress. The support of our closest allies and the United Nations wasn't as important as was the buy-in by Democratic Party leaders. In the lead-up to the war, President Bush also received critical support from well-known writers and analysts who hailed from the center-left.

Brandishing arguments that the invasion of Iraq would spark a democratic revolution in the greater Middle East, the neocons managed to forge a powerful political coalition that sidelined Republican realists like James Baker and Brent Scowcroft as well as anti-war Democrats like Robert Byrd and Paul Wellstone. As the invasion plans advanced, both the neocons and the liberal hawks dismissed the opponents of the war as being reflexively pacifist and hopelessly naïve.

Two Project for a New American Century (PNAC) letters in March 2003 played to those Democrats who believed that the invasion was justified at least as much by humanitarian concerns as it was by the purported presence of weapons of mass destruction. PNAC and the neocon camp had managed to translate their military agenda of preemptive and preventive strikes into national security policy. With the invasion underway, they sought to preempt those hardliners and military officials who opted for a quick exit strategy in Iraq. In their March 19th letter, PNAC stated that Washington should plan to stay in Iraq for the long haul: "Everyone – those who have joined the coalition, those who have stood aside, those who opposed military action, and, most of all, the Iraqi people and their neighbors – must understand that we are committed to the rebuilding of Iraq and will provide the necessary resources and will remain for as long as it takes.".....

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0522-10.htm

[Aidoneus]

1. Not so much an 'explanation'

but rather, to be held accountable.

[Classical_Liberal]

3. That would be nice too. It gals me that they still run the party

after all this.

[LittleApple81]

4. It galls me too (gauls are the French...) n/t

[trumad]

2. LOL... Grasping at straws...

Besides, Daalder is a big time PNAC'er....

[Dogmudgeon]

5. The difficult easy answer

"I believed a lie."

"I trusted a man who proved himself to be untrustworthy."

"It was a serious lapse in my judgement, and I can not deny it."

But if you want revenge, you'll have to get it in the voting booth.

--bkl