That makes sense to me. What does a newspaper editorial board know about this sort of thing? They can comment on strategy maybe, at the global level, but not tactical stuff. Just my own ign'nant two cents.
Yes. Keep the politicians out of it and let the troops finish this job this time.
They were pulled back (by politics) at least 3 times in the last year.
Let them finish, or we will have a problem for the next decade.
Don't do a 'Clinton does Somolia, then tucks and runs'.
George W. Bush is very pragmatic. He was well aware that a major military offensive in Fallujah prior to the U.S. elections would expose him to the Mainstream Media's impossible (and corrupt) standards. If we had attacked a month ago and killed 10,000 insurgents, while six Iraqi civilians were killed, along with two American soldiers, the press would have had full-scale coverage of the funerals of the innocents and wall-to-wall interviews of the family and friends of the fallen heroes. The stabilizing effect on the war would barely get a mention. Now, freed from these unfair constraints, Bush is ready to unleash the dogs of war.
This is another example from the BEST newspaper in the country. You can subscribe on line for much less than the paper version, and you then have no paper to lug off for recycling, and you can save clippings on your hard drive.
WSJ is the greatest!