The "Stable Iraq" Thing

What Matthew Yglesias said. One thing people upset about this should keep in mind is that we now have an election between John Kerry and George Bush. Talking about the right goal is nice, but worse than useless unless you can actually achieve anything. And, given the fact that the Bush administration has completely bungled post-war Iraq so far, do those disappointed in Kerry's "stable" rhetoric want risk what things could look like if Bush does his version of staying the course for the next four years? Kerry, on the other hand, could manage it back into stability, and then if they want they can elect somone else to take it from there. When a situation is this bad, you need to take what you can get. Stability is a prerequisite of democracy, not its opposite. And how long was it before Germany and Japan became democracies after World War II?