The decision by Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi to throw in the towel on the Iraq-withdrawal timeline has been widely denounced by the left and acknowledged by the Conventional Wisdomariat as the Dems coming to terms with "political reality". That reality, of course, is that George W. Bush was prepared to tough it out, to veto timeline-plus-funding bill after timeline-plus-funding bill, and to blame the Dems for the result. What this sad spectacle teaches us, I think, is that the Democrats, in their pathetic excuse for strategizing, have replicated one of the basic flaws of the Bush regime, documented in Thomas Ricks' essential history of the Iraq war, Fiasco: the insistence on basing strategic decisions on best-case scenarios, and discarding (or refusing even to consider) worst-case scenarios. What other explanation is there for the Dems' behavior?
They assumed they could out-bluff the Bluffer in Chief, and their backup plan was as profound and nuanced as the Bush administration's plan for a post-war epoch in which flowers were not strewn by Iraqis at our soldiers, at least without explosive devices inside. The Democrats never apparently envisioned the George W. Bush we all know--a stubborn cynical true believer who is prepared to sacrifice everything for the sake of his crusade in the middle east. Had the Dems actually faced the reality of their adversary--had Bush actually faced the nature of the situation into which he brought us and our troops--America's current plight might be substantially less dire. Perhaps the sole threshold question for any candidate seeking our vote in 2008 should be: what's your backup plan in case the worst case turns out to be reality?