Thomas Friedman is on a roll with his "War of Ideas" series of articles. Every one has been short, to the point, and smack full of great insight. This one is no different. Only this time around, I beat Jeremy to Meme'ing it. :)

In this one, Friedman focuses on the Dems and Iraq. Here is a taste:

My hope is that Iowa will embolden the Blair Democrats to shuck off their intimidation, by Mr. Bush and Mr. Dean, and press their case. It is the only way to build a national consensus for what's going to be a long cold-war-like struggle to strengthen the forces of moderation and weaken the forces of violent intolerance within the Arab-Muslim world — which is what the real war on terrorism is about.

] Second, sometimes smashing someone in the face is
] necessary to signal others that they will be held
] accountable for the intolerance they incubate. Removing
] the Taliban and Saddam sent that message to every
] government in the area.

This is a good series. This article offers a sound bitey version of why we went to War in Iraq.

Rattle wrote: "Thomas Friedman is on a roll with his 'War of Ideas' series of articles. Every one has been short, to the point, and smack full of great insight. This one is no different.

In this one, Friedman focuses on the Dems and Iraq. Here is a taste:"

My hope is that Iowa will embolden the Blair Democrats to shuck off their intimidation, by Mr. Bush and Mr. Dean, and press their case. It is the only way to build a national consensus for what's going to be a long cold-war-like struggle to strengthen the forces of moderation and weaken the forces of violent intolerance within the Arab-Muslim world — which is what the real war on terrorism is about.

If you watched the New Hampshire debate, you saw clear evidence of this next comment with Wesley Clark:

Mr. Bush's lightning victory in Iraq intimidated those who favored the war but had reservations about the Bush approach. And then, when things started to go sour in Iraq, Mr. Dean's outspoken opposition to the war -- and the eager reception it received from some Democratic activists -- got those Democrats who did vote for the war tied into pretzels, trying to simultaneously justify their war vote and distance themselves from it.

One of the panelists asked him to explain an editorial he wrote for The Times of London, an excerpt from which seemed to have Clark praising Bush for a job well done. Clark's response suggested he felt his position was logically consistent, but he was struggling to explain it succinctly to the public.