As historians are fond of noting, any ex post facto analysis of a choice of options cannot be a comparison of the status quo ante and the option selected, if different.  The status quo cannot be assumed to continue, and the comparison has to be where are we now and where would we be if we had done nothing.

I have thought of this while reading the news from Lebabnon.  Amid the analysis of the Israeli/Hezbollah conflict and of the Iraq war, I have yet to see any discussion of any link between the two.  Specifically, what position would we, and more importantly, Israel, be in if we were not currently in Iraq and if, added to the current mix, were an emboldened and hostile Iraq led by Saddam Hussein.   

There was a time when the preservation of israel was a strong concern of the Democratic party.  If memory serves me correctly, the previous President Bush wa spilloried for his lack of support for that country.  It appears that Democrats have abandoned that position entirely.  A complete withdrawal from Iraq would have immeasurable consequences, but one consequence that I think could be measured is the impact on Israel.  How does one reconcile support for Israel with withdrawal from the area?  Beats me.