John Hinderaker, at Power Line, notes that the democrat choice of withdrawal and defeat is likely to prove more sanguinary than staying the course.
How many millions were slain in Indochina in the late 1970s after US withdrawal, after all?
The death rate in Baghdad these days, with the rival militias and insugents in full operation, isn’t really terrribly different, after all, from the death rate produced by gang warfare in such democrat strongholds as Oakland and the District of Columbia.
We haven’t lost in Iraq, and we probably won’t if we remain determined to prevail. The situation today is not good in some parts of Iraq, but the implicit suggestion that it can’t get worse is absurd. As I wrote here, the current murder rate in Baghdad is around four times the murder rate in Washington, D.C. in 1991. The murder rate for Iraq as a whole is not quite double the 1991 Washington D.C. rate. This is a high level of violence, to be sure. But it is nothing compared to an actual civil war. It is nothing compared to genocide. If the Democrats win in November, they are likely to have, before long, a great deal of blood on their hands.