I really like what Mark Shields said on Newshour:

[ginnyinWI]

He said that if * really means what he's saying--that this struggle with Islamists is as big as the struggle against the Nazis and Hitler, then why the hell doesn't he have a half a million troops over there fighting them? If this is the ultimate struggle for the survival of civilization, why only a paltry 130,000 troops, and "staying" a failed course?? Why aren't we doing everything possible to defeat them, if failure to "win" means our country would soon be overrun with enemies fighting us in our supermarkets?

Let him put his money where his mouth is, for heaven's sake, if the threat is all that real! This proves he doesn't really believe his own words, for all of his pounding of podiums.

[existentialist]

1. Not to mention that he would . . .

raise taxes, especially on the rich,


support alternative fuels and conservation measures,


fire Rumsfeld and at least a half a dozen of our present generals,


dump Bolten, and find an ambassador who could persuade rather than just bully,


Oh, where to start?

[teryang]

2. Larger forces divert war profiteer revenues to personnel costs

That's the reason. The expenditure of funds is as great as during the height of the Vietnam conflict, but a force too small to impose order is fielded in Iraq.

[Nite Owl]

3. It would also mean a draft

And a lot of his buddies little rich kids might be making their way around Iraq. Maybe even his own Jenna and Barbara!

[ginnyinWI]

4. exactly

If this is life-or-death, where is the call for a draft? Everyone knows our military is stretched right now. Call for a draft, raise taxes and let's get on with it, * and Rummy --or else STFU!