The Iraq war debate is churning Congress these days, with both Houses considering different versions of non-binding resolutions to support the troops, the flag, the war on terror and staying in Iraq forever and ever, Amen. The Republicans think that then have an advantage because they are united behind the idea of "stay the course" while Dems are divided between those who wish to withdrawal and those who feel we need to stay. I can see the case for staying - prevent civil war, US troops only thing holding the country together, and so on. But as the song says "If I go there will be trouble/An' if I stay it will be double" I believe that we are going to have to withdrawal eventually anyway, so it might as well be sooner rather than later. Not to mention the government we are backing and creating is clearly a Shia theocracy, complete with death squads, torture and repression.
Its important to note that while debates on the Democratic side are about the length of our stay in Iraq, the GOP has committed itself to stay in Iraq forever. The lines go like this- Iraq is the central front in the war on terror, If we withdraw from Iraq the terrorist have won, 9/11 changed everything, etc, etc, etc. But if an Iraq withdrawal means an Al Queda victory, we can never pull out. Never. That's the rhetorical corner that the GOP has painted itself into. Iraq is not going to be a peacefull place for a generation, maybe ever. So if you don't think we can stay a generation, then we are going to have to leave. The only debate is how we leave and when. If we face up to the fact we are leaving Iraq, then we can have a real debate.