atrios is right. the democratic presidential candidates could be leading the charge for a withdrawal--a full withdrawal with no residual force--right now. instead, everyone except the second and third tier candidates are talking about reducing a u.s. presence but leaving a reduced military presence behind. but the "residual force" option happens to be one of the few options we have in iraq that's actually worse than the status quo. the lead candidates need to start talking about a way out of iraq, all the way out, today. if nothing else than to splash some cold water on the administration's september offensive. i don't think it's too late. but if they really want to end this travesty in iraq, they need to start talking about it.
nothing in this post is anything original, the big blogs of left blogistan have been talking along these lines for a while (and this entire post is basically ripped straight offa that atrios post linked at the beginning of the the first paragraph). i haven't talked about the "residual force" thing much because i have nothing to say that isn't being said better elsewhere already. and yet it's been on my mind a lot, so it seems odd not to articulate it. which is, i guess, all this post is for.
