Yeah, I'll just do this for you, Weisberg. I'll suggest war-voter Hillary Clinton tell me why she should answer for our 4000 troop deaths when the pro-war editor of Slate (and the person responsible for my being able to ask such a question of her) won't volunteer, can't bring himself to do, that very thing.

Maybe if you make it like a church picnic. Those of us who submit a war question receive a free chance to hear our favorite dead vet's name be announced on the big day (or final evening, or whatever). Oh, and fireworks. There should be fireworks.

It's too late for the likes of Clinton and Edwards, Weisberg, just like it's too late for you.

Toke, get informed. This is a war. People die. We will win this war. Not difficult ha?

WIN this war? Define win.

War? Define war!

RonB, what would you think we could do to "win" this war? In a country which has for centuries not accepted "tolerance" in the most minimal respects, how can we create a democracy?

If you don't think we have to build a democracy, in order to "win", I have to ask the same question OneToke did. Define "win".

SilverG, if I understand you correctly, I think we agree. Iraq is not ready for democracy by a long bite (as Samwise Gamgee would say). But the war in Iraq is long over. We are babysitting internal strife, except to the extent we are fighting against AQM.

Thanks, RonB52. You are correct. We agree.

I wish I understood why it is acceptable for our mighty leader to say, "Make no mistake! This is a war!" but to treat it as if it is NOT a war, in order to keep our troops from having the kind of rotation of serving that a war would require. Everyone calls this a war ... until you get down to the technicality in which we'd have to admit we started a war.