Belmont Club and Trent Telenko weigh in.

Me? It depends on how one defines a civil war. Also, there is an implicit assumption that a civil war in Iraq is a disaster for the US (which is why so much of the Bush-hating press wants to play it up). But civil wars can end, and have outcomes, and the outcome of this one certainly has the potential for continuing to achieve our Middle East goals (in this case, providing a stable source of oil to counter the Saudis, the establishment of a base from which to further pressure Iran, Saudi Arabia and Syria).

When I hear the whining and the straw men about how Bush "lied" about how easy this would be, I wonder where they were when he was saying shortly after September 11 that this was a struggle that would take decades, and when Rumsfeld was saying that it would be a long, hard slog. I certainly never had any expectations that this would be easy, or happen overnight. In fact, it's gone about as well as I expected, and it's certainly gone much better than many of those who opposed it predicted (oil fields on fire, many thousands of innocent casualties, complete anarchy, Iran and/or Syria taking over, casualties from WMD that he didn't have, etc.).

And sometime, I need to sit down and write up the likely alternate history had we not removed Saddam. That wouldn't be a pretty picture, either, for the Iraqis, us, or the world. As the general once said, war is a series of shitty choices.

[Update at 10 AM EST]

Gerard Baker has done exactly that.

Wow, you mean I'm not the only that recalls Bush comments after 9/11. I remember the speech on that day, the speech of October 7th announcing the start of OIF, and the 2003 SOTU (the whole speech, not just 16 words). I remember words like perseverance, patients, and resolve. Here is just one paragraph from the October 7th speech: " In the months ahead, our patience will be one of our strengths -- patience with the long waits that will result from tighter security; patience and understanding that it will take time to achieve our goals; patience in all the sacrifices that may come. "

Civil war sounds better than insurgency. And Insurgency sounds better than terrorist. The fact is, Zarqawi is a mercenary. If he is captured, by the rights provided by the Geneva Convention, he can be shot without trial even if he surrendered. He, and his followers, have conducted attacks in Jordan, Afghanistan, and now Iraq. Considering his history, I have no idea why anyone would think an operation in Iraq conducted by his command would be anything close to a Civil War.

Pardon the pun, but you don’t have to be a rocket scientist to see the strategic value of the war in Iraq. We have been dancing around the real issue since “Jimmy” was the president. Iran. Take out a map and look at the positioning of our resources.
We have been looked at the Middle East since before the “67” war, clucked our tongues and said it a shame but their not much that can be done. When the Ayatollah took hostages we cringed and did nothing. We have feed the terrorists organizations indirectly with petrodollars from around the world. We have turned a blind eye while these Islamo- fascists have taken over governments.
Well I’m sorry that the swamp is full of alligators. It’s a shame that they won’t all stand up and wave when we call in an air strike. Sooner or later we had to go there and deal with this problem. We picked a place on the high ground where we could reasonably expect to gain support from the local population and begin to drain the swamp. Did anyone really expect the terrorists to do anything other than what they have done? Did anyone believe this was going to run like a video game?
Today we are faced with in my opinion the most dangerous threat to our national security in my lifetime. A political organization disguised as a religion, hiding in a church, and plotting to destroy civilization as we know it. And their greatest defender is one of our own political parties.

"Gerard Baker has done exactly that."

I read the article. I'm sure glad that by invading Iraq we managed to prevent the Madrid and London bombings that Baker predicted would happen. And I'm also glad that nobody is talking about giving Saddam a Nobel Peace Prize.

Seriously, this was a parody, right?

Bombings in Europe were probably inevitable under any scenario, in the near term.

I'm also glad that nobody is talking about giving Saddam a Nobel Peace Prize.

You find that incredible? I might think so, too, were it not for the fact that these are the same people who gave one to Yasser Arafat.

" In the months ahead, our patience will be one of our strengths -- patience with the long waits that will result from tighter security; patience and understanding that it will take time to achieve our goals; patience in all the sacrifices that may come. "

Okay, how many more months will it be?

Okay, how many more months will it be?

Real patience means not knowing the answer, but being patient anyway.

Civil war sounds better than insurgency. And Insurgency sounds better than terrorist. The fact is, Zarqawi is a mercenary. If he is captured, by the rights provided by the Geneva Convention, he can be shot without trial even if he surrendered. He, and his followers, have conducted attacks in Jordan, Afghanistan, and now Iraq. Considering his history, I have no idea why anyone would think an operation in Iraq conducted by his command would be anything close to a Civil War.

Zarqaw's group is only one of several factions involved, and they're the only major one gettting pumped with people from outside Iraq. You also have old Ba'athists and other Sunni groups, Shiite militia, etc involved. Those people are mostly local.

When the Ayatollah took hostages we cringed and did nothing.

Bollocks. The US rushed together one of the largest special ops operations in history and, well, failed. Sh*t happens.

And then after that America helped sponsor both sides in a brutal destructive war that killed over a million people, but effectivily tied down Iran (and Iraq) for a decade.

The idea that it was America passivity that allow the Middle East to turn out the way it did is only a comforting illusion. The precise opposite is closer to the truth.

The fact is, Zarqawi is a mercenary.

Zarqawi is irrelevent. This thing has a life of its own; a thousand-year old holy war within Islam reignited by Rumsfeld's clumsiness.

It is easy to discuss the need for sacrifice from the comfort
of your computer room in the states. It is easy to discuss
the need for sacrifice while benefitting from tax cuts.

If you believed in this war, wouldn't you be
buying bonds and working as a contractor in Baghdad?

If you believed in this war, wouldn't you be
buying bonds and working as a contractor in Baghdad?

Ah, one can never have a thread about the war without some anonymous moron using the stupid and illogical "chicken hawk" argument.

If you believed in this war, wouldn't you be buying bonds and working as a contractor in Baghdad?

New rules. Whenever a moonbat dredges up the "chickenhawk" meme, we all have to do a shot.