Mark Steyn might agree.

Building on Fuzzybear Lioness' link in the comments:

"It's not the American people or the U.S. Congress who are emboldening the enemy," said Democratic Sen. Joe Biden, a White House hopeful in 2008. "It's the failed policy of this president — going to war without a strategy, going to war prematurely."

So, going to war was still a Good Thing, then Senator? We only opened the campaign "prematurely"? If so - how about the Democrats proposing a plan to *win* it then? Of course, it's easy to carp. Talking heads (myself included) have that bit easy, don't we?

No doubt the campaign (it's *not* a war, it's a component of an overall war) has not gone as envisioned, and that the vision, while broad and expansive, was not undergirt well.

But, since you apparently approve of going to war, just not how - how do you propose to retrieve the situation? We already know about the effective abandonment plans. Are there others, that might lead to a more satisfying solution that is in the national interest?

Or, if full withdrawal is the only option left - and that's all you've got - then say so.

Don't be the mealy-mouthed teller of lies and half-truths you accuse the President of being.

C'mon. Stand and deliver. You keep saying that's what we want. When are we going to see affirmative, and accountable, actions to match the rhetoric?

As I said of Prime Minister Maliki - Actions, sir. Actions.

Let's get some proposals on the table that aren't just rhetorical gambits and let's vote on 'em.

Y'all got the brass ring. Do something with it besides... pose.