Matthew Yglesias has an interesting post up about the travails of being a "liberal hawk". I, personally, am in the liberal-hawk-but-for-Bush camp on this. As in, I could support an effort to put the squeeze on Saddam, maybe even remove him from power, just so long as Bush is not the one in charge. For I firmly believe that, even given the best possible outcome in the short term, Bush WILL blow it and we will end up with a situation far worse than what we have now. I would much rather have to deal with the humiliation of backing down than the consequences of "success". After all, I already think America has been humiliated just by having this asshole in power in the first place, so having to back down won't be much worse for our international image. Indeed, if we manage to reduce Dubya to nothing more than a weak place-holder until 2004 than I think our image in the eyes of the world might actually improve. Them, whoever comes to power after Dubya would have a better chance of rebuilding our international reputation. As it is, we are swimming in a lake of shit and the only thing keeping us from pulling ourselves out is Bush's drive for war. Stop that drive and, at least, we might be able to tread until we can get this idiot out of the way. That's my opinion.