I am getting exceedingly tired of this line from the left: "It was catastrophic to rush to war without a plan to win the peace." Edwards is just the latest Democrat to say it. Two part rant.
1) There was no "rush to war." President Bush called for UN action against Iraq in a speech in September 2002, was granted power to go to war by congress in October, and gathered a coalition of 33 other countries to do the job. The war did not start until March of 2003. That may seem a bit rushed, but many had said for years that "[Saddam] is and has acted like a terrorist." Oh, by the way, that quote is from John Kerry. Don't believe me?
Anyone considering voting for John Kerry should watch this
. There is no partisan bashing, no snippy narrator, just Kerry's own interviews and television appearances.
2) This was a war. Contrary to popular liberal beliefs, you go to war with a plan to win the war
; "winning the peace," whatever the heck that's supposed to mean, is secondary. The first job is to defeat the enemy, not to make friends with everybody on the way. What is
"winning the peace" supposed to be, anyway? All I've heard is that is we did, everyone would love us, Iraq would be a happy, pristine place, and the world would be peachy. Please excuse me if I think that this emphasis on being universally liked over winning the war is a bit naive.