ArchPundit

Duncan made a good point the other day about Obama’s statement about the war:

The basic content of what Obama is saying, divorced from the larger debate, is fine, but as to how it plays in the current debate it’s not fine. It allows us to wait around one more Friedman… and then something will happen. Except it won’t happen. Troops will not start coming home 4-6 months from now. And, most likely, 4-6 months from now Obama won’t be saying “bring them home now,” though I’ve put him on my little calendar and will make sure to check back then and let you know.

The thing is that “bring them home now” doesn’t really mean now. It doesn’t mean that thousands of troops start boarding transport planes for the trip home. It just means that the focus shifts from staying to leaving, and the latter slowly begins to happen. Every time someone punts that action for yet another Friedman, it helps to ensure that the end of the war will always be a Friedman away.

I agreed with Duncan at the time even though I’m very sympathetic to what Obama is saying. Ultimately, Duncan was right though. Discussing Iraq in terms of how pony plans doesn’t work no matter how well intentioned and serious the idea. If George Bush believes all that is happening is that people are going to offer alternative plans he’ll keep sending troops to Iraq like a gambling addict chasing his losses.

The thing is, here’s Duncan today:

I suppose it’s progress that major Democrats are trying to one-up each other on legislation-about-Iraq-that-won’t pass. Still, now that they have a majority and seem to generally agree that ending the war is the right thing to do I’d prefer it if they got into a room and found something they could all get behind which would be an attempt to end this thing.

I do think Democrats (ones in office more than the 60s-scarred punditry) are at least understanding that this war is unpopular and there will be no backlash against them for attempts to end it.

Someone running for President and getting the message that there has to be a loud and unambiguous message to Bush that it’s time to get out, has to and should do exactly what Obama is doing. Yeah, it’s more symbolism than substance in one sense, but it turns the debate exactly as Duncan wanted to one of getting the fuck out. Obama and everyone besides Joe Biden will be able to still work together on mutually agreed upon plans after this, but the loud and clear call isn’t a bad thing.

So Obama’s doing what we wanted him to do and actually I think Duncan is doing exactly what he was previously annoyed with Obama doing which was to avoid the limelight and work with everyone on a plan in the Senate to get this over with. Duncan has good points in both cases, but I think we need to realize Obama’s statement is

a) a reflection of what he’s come to realize

and

b) exactly what Duncan (and I) were asking for essentially.