They like to claim their opposition is something new based on the errors of the current war.
But it is nothing new. I wrote this in March 2004 (from my old site):
Opponents of the Iraq War are still fighting about the decision to go to war. They argue that while they oppose the Iraq War, the acrimony is all the President’s fault for failing to do X or to get Y’s cooperation. If only we could have just stuck with the universally supported war on al Qaeda and the Taliban, they argue, we’d be one big unified country.
But back then, many of the usual suspects argued against going to war against the Taliban:
While most of the recent media attention has focused on early internal debates about Iraqi involvement, in fact the early public debate about 9/11 was over whether Bush was rash in declaring "war" on the terrorists. Most experts and pundits -- especially among our allies -- still clung to the "counterterrorism as law enforcement" mind-set. And viewed from that frame, it was foolhardy to declare war.
For starters, declaring war seemed to elevate the terrorists to co-combatants, rather than leaving them as criminals to be dealt with by police dragnet. The decision to invade Afghanistan was even more controversial. Suddenly armchair experts were quoting Kipling and ruminating on how the Afghans had twice defeated reigning military powers, first the British Empire and then the Soviet Empire.
Some even recall the Persian Gulf War with nostalgia as a great coalition when in 1990 and 1991, they opposed the war.
And the Cold War was a struggle we all supported, they say, conveniently forgetting their opposition to the weapons and strategies to oppose the Soviet Union. Then, while the cold war raged, we were “morally equivalent.”
I dare say, it won’t be long before we must debate what to do about Iran, and the “anti-war” side will rush to oppose any forceful action, defending their opposition behind the shield of recalling the unity of the last war—the Iraq War of 2003.
Really, as a general rule, it is only the proposed war to defend ourselves that the loyal opposition opposes, not the past victories. When these people say war is the last resort, they mean it far more literally than anyone could possibly believe.
I was premature in judging that war opponents would recall the glorious consensus on the Iraq War--but I don't think I am wrong. It will take longer to win in Iraq and so longer for Iraq to be the last war that the anti-war side can recall with fondness. But with the talk of Afghanistan as the "good war" now, when once it was a rushed wrong answer to 9/11 for these people should be instructive.
The vast majority of the anti-war side simply doesn't like to admit they don't like to fight in defense of our country unless the polls show they can safely do so.
