"Where the Bush administration has failed, tragically and repeatedly, is in explaining to the American public why U.S. forces were sent into Iraq in the first place, and why they must remain there now."(Oh, and the lying, the shock and awe arrogance, the flouting of international law, that's sort of beside the point.)
"Certainly, the United States has a moral obligation to deal with the chaos and anarchy that were, at least partially, unleashed by the U.S. invasion of Iraq. But that falls into the category of something we're doing for them. The president cannot and should not expect Americans to give their open-ended support to a nation that seems overwhelmingly to regard our troops as 'invaders and occupiers.'"(We're doing it for them and they are so ungrateful, those devils!)
"What, then? There is a reason for keeping U.S. troops in Iraq that has more to do with American interests: stability in the Persian Gulf, the world's single largest producer and exporter of oil and natural gas."(Yes, four years of US troops in Iraq has brought amazing stability to the region.)
"Do we know for a fact that, without U.S. troops in Iraq, that country's chaos would bleed into Saudi Arabia and Kuwait; Egypt, Syria and Jordan? No. But chances are better than even that it would — and you can throw Iran into the mix."This is mind-numbingly stupid. I wonder who at NPR fished Ted Koppel out of the talking head tank anyway - does he ever have an original, provocative thought? And I wonder how much he makes for his brilliant analysis? Frankly anything over zero is too much.