Short media memory

The media has been in a tizzy since Ken Pollack and Michael O'Hanlon, two CRAZY LIBERAL SOCIALIST THINK TANK HIPPIES Brookings Institution scholars published an interim report saying that the increased troop presence was working in Iraq. OMG, the media says, if Pollack and O'Hanlon, who have been "highly critical of the war," say it's working, the left is in trouble!

Ken Pollack was a leading liberal hawk leading up to the invasion. He made his case in the enormously popular bookThe Threatening Storm: The Case for Invading Iraq. He was on every Sunday morning talk show ever hyping the invasion.
Yes, since then he has decided the war went badly, but his criticism has been of the strategy and tactics of the invasion, not of the ideological justifications for going in. And he, like everyone else, has a vested interest in being vindicated by history. In this case, Pollack isn't a flip-flopper. Even though I categorically disagreed with him in 2003, and I categorically disagree with him today, he's been remarkably consistent on Iraq throughout his career. He wanted Saddam gone. He advocated a specific invasion strategy. He criticized the administration for botching the job. Now, he's hopeful something good can come out of it.
Folks on the left thought it was stupid, dangerous, and a tragic misalignment of priorities to invade. We thought that what happened in the wake of the invasion was predicable and tantamount to crimes against humanity. We now believe it is highly unlikely that US troop presence will do anything more than prolong the sectionalism, destruction of infrastructure, and incite more ethnic cleansing to throughout the region.
Pollack is a smart man, and a scholar worthy of respect. But his report is not indicative of folks on the left switching teams.
I don't know much about O'Hanlon, but I'm sure he's fine too.
Enjoy your Monday!