Leftists 'Re-Litigate' the #Iraq War

I noted the other day how MSNBC's Mika Brzezinski wanted "to go back and 're-litigate' the origins of the war in 2003."

I suppose it's a standard of our time, but everything nowadays --- and I mean everything --- is evaluated through the harsh lens of political polarization.

Today's exhibit: David Atkins' piece attacking the evil "neocons" at the Washington Monthly, "The brutal neoconservative legacy in Iraq."

The funny thing about this: I don't disagree with a lot of the criticism. It's just too obviously bothersome to note that President Bush had bipartisan support for approving 2002's Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution, including a majority of the Democrats (58 percent) in the Senate, and especially Hillary Clinton. (And recall President Bill Clinton signed the Iraqi Liberation Act in 1998, authorizing regime change in Baghdad as a continuation of U.S. policy since the 1991 Persian Gulf War).



So, yeah, a lot went wrong with the war, but the deployment had the support of the American people, as well as top political leaders across the spectrum. The attacks on the war since 2003 have been the most treasonous political about-face in modern times, if not in American history. The true face of the Democrat Party was revealed for all to see at that time, and the country ultimately elected Barack Obama to the White House on a hard left antiwar platform. And how's that working out? The fruits of the antiwar movement are now seen today from the release of Bowe Bergdahl to the coming collapse of Baghdad. That's the Democrat Party legacy. And that's what's going to be remembered when people ask "Who lost Iraq"?

Hat Tip: BooMan Tribune and Memeorandum.