I hate to admit that Bush was right and the liberals were wrong.  I really, really hate to admit it.  Most of all I'm afraid of what this will do to the 2008 campaign.  But, in the spirit of academic honesty, an article from the latest Economist:

Must they be wars without end?

"Democracies need the courage to withdraw from wars that bring no good, but also to persevere in just ones—even when the end is not yet in sight."

Another reason I hate the idea of Bush being right is that he still wasn't really right.  I always believed invading Iraq was the right thing to do, but Bush managed to do the right thing in the wrong way, and for the wrong reasons.  Because of his awful job, our generation has been scarred by this awful mess.  I am an optimist, and I do believe the mess can be cleaned up by a Democratic president, and I also believe the international community will eventually forgive us.  But in the mean time, my God, what a mess.

And the problem with this line of reasoning is it's too subtle.  Liberals dig it, but conservatives don't.  And neither does Middle America, which is why the conservatives have been kicking our butts since 2000.  History will record the conversation thus: "Bush did an awful job."  "Yeah, but he was right."  That bugs me.

Someone I know came up with the perfect simile:  Imagine an ambulance driver with a patient who desperately needs to get to the hospital.  The driver does a terrible job, taking the wrong route, hitting cars, smashing fire hydrants, even hitting pedestrians on the way to the hospital.  When he finally gets to the hospital, the EMTs say "What on earth were you doing???"

"Well, we had to get to the hospital."

"Yeah, but not like that."

Still, I wonder if history--or even the American people in the next election--can handle that level of subtlety.

J

PS: Of course, there's still a good chance this could all get worse again.  But that's not something to hope for.