Eerily prescient questions.

This was written by James Fallows in the Atlantic Monthly. The piece was written in November 2002, four months before the invasion of Iraq.

"Going to war with Iraq would mean shouldering all the responsibilities of an occupying power the moment victory was achieved. These would include running the economy, keeping domestic peace, and protecting Iraq's borders—and doing it all for years, or perhaps decades.
Are we ready for this long-term relationship?"

We fight them over there, so we don't have to fight them here. Sounds good. I'd be for that, too. If it wasn't for the fact that every Iraqi that gets killed for walking down the street gets blamed on the invasion, and in turn the American people. Which includes me, as it were. The hatred and resentment of the Iraqis creates more terrorists. It's a vicious cycle.

I don't want U.S. soldiers dying to create an Islamic state of terrorists. Is that so bad?