But for Iraq?

It seems that a recent thread in the Left's complaints about Iraq is that focusing on Iraq prevented us from stopping the rise of Iran's threat.

First, good for our Left in admitting that Iran is a threat. All this time their cries of "prove Iran is making nukes or shipping IEDs to Iraq" made me think they viewed Ahmadinejad as a friendly if outspoken friend. Soo good for them! Reality does have a place in their community.

But the biggest problem with the claim that Bush has made the problem worse is the implied result that Bush could have--with the anti-war side's support--ended the Iranian threat.

What world of delusion to you have to inhabit to believe the anti-war side would have supported any effort to defang Iran and stop their nuclear progress?

Sanctions? Blockade? Air strikes? Covert operations? Coup? Give me a break. The Left's idea of "solving" the Iran problem consists of shoveling money at Tehran and then pretending to believe Ahmadinejad's solemn vow that he will never develop nuclear weapons.

And obviously, their plan of just giving up is not inhibited by any number of troops fighting in Iraq.

Try a more plausible line of attack, please.