A useful reminder by Leon Hadar in The American Conservative:
The benchmarks to measure success in Iraq should be the ones that Bush, McCain and the other cheer-leaders had provided before Congress authorized Bush to go to war. That should be the context for the debate on Iraq during this election:
1. We would discover weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
2. We would uncover the ties between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Ladin.
3. The war in Iraq would be as short and relatively costless in terms of American lives and U.S. dollars as the war in Afghanistan.
4. “Liberated†Iraq would be a unified nation-state and free of ethnic and religious rivalries as well as of foreign occupation.
5. A democratic and secular Iraq would become a political model for the entire Broader Middle East and would create the conditions for a political and economic liberalization in the Arab world.
6. Iraq would not require American economic assistance since it economy would grow and the country would become prosperous thanks to its growing oil revenues.
7. The U.S. military victory in Iraq would strengthen U.S. strategic position in the Middle East
(a) encouraging other global and regional powers to jump on the American bandwagon,
(b) weakening the power of anti-Americans governments (Iran) and terrorist groups,
(c) helping revive the Palestinian-Israeli peace process (â€The road to Jerusalem leads through Baghdadâ€),
and (d) putting pressure on North Korea and Iran to end their nuclear military programs.
Now…based on these high standards set-up by the Bush Administration, it has failed in achieving all these seven goals (and related others). Seven F’s. Time to switch that kid to another school.