The answer is, No, he won't.

By his own admission, Hitchens is a "one issue" man - that's what he boasted at the last election, the Democrats' less hawkish line on Iraq being the reason he supported the Bush regime instead.

This is one of the reasons why he is a pseudo-intellectual: He merely uses fancy language but, behind that, and sporadically rearing its ugly face, is his boorish soccer hooligan simpleton thinking: "Bring it on!" "I know what side I'm on!" 'Belief in God is stupid – the anti-God team rules!'

In fact, more than pseudo-, Hitchens is actually anti-intellectual. He is contemptuous of true intellectuals, - Chomsky, Cockburn, Monbiot, Fisk, Johnson ... - who can think multi-dimensionally, take account of complexities (Hitchens merely spits on notions such as 'Blowback'); and discuss Iraq in wider contexts such as global security generally (including climate change and nuclear proliferation), geopolitical motivations and priorities, political institutions (the simpleton Hitchens prefers merely to hurl abuse at, say, the UN), inconsistencies and hypocrisies, et al.

This is why Hitchens is practically silent on Israeli occupation, Turkey's treatment of the Kurds (comparable to Saddam, but a regime expediently supported, not condemned, by his beloved Bush regime), Uzbekistan's human rights record (comparable to Saddam, but a regime expediently supported, not condemned, by the Bush regime), compared to his drum-beating about the evils of Saddam and the necessity of the glorious bombing (which he courageously cheered from the dangerous vantage point of his desk and keyboard), the war-crime illegality of which he is silent about because it ruffles his simpleton's good-against-evil narrative.

Hitchens is a disgusting entity. Perhaps the whisky is how Hitchens helps hide that ugly truth from himself.