Neo-cons and some others on the right have been aiming for a fight with Iran for years now, and if we go to war it will be mostly due to the efforts of a small faction who have been itching for the war.

I've been pretty steadfast in the idea that war with Iran will cause more problems than it will solve. Certainly, McCain knows, more than even most of us who have been to war, the high price it entails. Few who have come home from a war have suffered more than he has.

Don't mistake willingness to go to war for enthusiasm for it. Only fools want war.

I think you guys are the real loser-defeatists. Withdrawal is unquestionably the best strategy going forward- why do you not think that the Americans could mitigate the violence that would (could!) ensue?

First, it should be pointed out that this delay is not cost free. As the NY Times pointed out today

Between now and September the battle for Baghdad will intensify, likely costing hundreds of American troops' lives

It would seem that Kerry's much maligned phrase, "No one wants to be the last man to die for a mistake" is going to be the de facto reality of our troops.

Second, I find it amazing that you seems unable to entertain the possibility that our "delaying the inevitable" won't make the "catastrophic" even more catastrophic. By McCain's (and yours, apparently) own admission, he doesn't have a clue as to what to do, where things are going and even how to measure success or failure. So, wrt to the inability to measure success of failure, it's strange to hear people who can't measure something say that it "will be even worse" when they can't even figure out trajectories in the existing situation, much less if something else happens.

Training and equipping the Iraqis to do an even better job of committing genocide when we "inevitably" leave seems completely irresponsible and not at all something that's a bulwark against disaster. It seems like making an inevitable disaster even worse.

But I guess I'm just a caveman and your modern millitary ways are simply baffling and confusing to me.

Well, al Qaeda was certainly not a mere fringe group in 2001. I'm not sure it's even true that they're stronger now than they were in 2001, merely that they have largely rebuilt after seeming to be decimated in 2003. Regardless, theire effectiveness is in resolve and personnel, not equipment. We still trump them there.

More importantly, though, al Qaeda is but a tiny part of the issue in Iraq.

I don't necessarily disagree with you--I was trying to understand the Bush/McCain logic.

While you may think that Al Qaeda is a "tiny part of the issue," in Iraq, Bush/McCain think otherwise.

By Bush's own admission, his strategy for combatting Al Qaeda has been a dismal failure and not progressed since he took office. As he said yesterday, "The same folks that are bombing innocent people in Iraq were the ones who attacked us in America on September the 11" and that we are likely facing "mass killings on a horrific scale" if the war ended today.

Given the billions of dollars he has put into the fight and the thousands of people that have been killed over the past six years, one would expect some better results than to have the country still possibly facing "mass killings on a horrific scale."

As you mention, McCain doesn't seem to have any plan other than to continue Bush's failures.

Given the fact that--at least according to Bush--Al Quaeda has grown from a fringe terrorist group in 2001 armed with supplies you can find in a dollar store to a force, today, that is capable of prolonged engagement with the most sophisticated military in the history of humanity, I doubt that the situation is going to change much in the next eight weeks.

Well, al Qaeda was certainly not a mere fringe group in 2001. I'm not sure it's even true that they're stronger now than they were in 2001, merely that they have largely rebuilt after seeming to be decimated in 2003. Regardless, theire effectiveness is in resolve and personnel, not equipment. We still trump them there.

More importantly, though, al Qaeda is but a tiny part of the issue in Iraq. There's a major regional crisis potentially afoot that goes beyond the terrorism issue.

Like me, he’s holding out hope that we can fix things without much evidence because, quite frankly, the consequences of admitting failure and withdrawing our forces may well be catastrophic.

Given the fact that--at least according to Bush--Al Quaeda has grown from a fringe terrorist group in 2001 armed with supplies you can find in a dollar store to a force, today, that is capable of prolonged engagement with the most sophisticated military in the history of humanity, I doubt that the situation is going to change much in the next eight weeks.