With the debate having died down, I don’t see much in the way of fresh thinking. Getting out of Iraq may make sense. But there is still the question of how, and at what cost, and, on that score, I don’t see much in the way of serious thinking. Hence why I focused on Ricks who has been on the ground and understands what the most realistic next steps will/can be.

The question for me is not whether the initial criticisms were valid. It’s whether the current thinking is informed and realistic, and I am not sure that it is.

Um… what this says is that the only people with ideas were the defenders of the war. because once they go silent, there’s a deficit of ideas.

All the ideas the anti-war crowd floated before and during the war – things like understanding why American foreign policy has caused so much hate, things like learning to work in collaboration with other nations rather than unilaterally, learning to respect international agencies and laws rather than flouting them at every turn – are still valid and viable.

True, the rest of the world – even that part that actually likes Americans – doesn’t trust the U.S. very much these days, given its inexplicable inability to do the right thing. Learning to listen to the voices of reason in your own midst – the people silent in this post – would be a good start.

There is only one viable option for the U.S. in Iraq – get out. The rest of the world has long ago reached this consensus (in fact, they reached it before the U.S. went in).