VDH on the Iraqi Debate

"The moral onus should have always been on the critics of the war. They should have been forced to explain why it was wrong to remove a fascist mass murderer, why it was wrong to stay rather than letting the country sink into Lebanon-like chaos, and why it was wrong not to abandon brave women, Kurds, and Shia who only wished for the chance of freedom."

I certainly would be happier with an administration more capable of getting this message out there, but I have to observations to make on this subject.

One, as I have argued in previous posts, they really are, it just doesn't get out. Just a few days ago I made mention of the Pentagon podcasts and the Pentagon Channel. Rumsfeld speaks all the time, and he's clear and direct. But his arguments are not being covered in the MSM. Condi Rice gets out there and makes arguments. I hear the President. If you know where to look, its all there. The MSM is elsewhere, however. Who is to blame? The Administration for not breaking through, or the MSM for its hear no evil approach?

Second, Mark Steyn has observed that he can identify with the notion that there is nothing more to say, either you get it or you don't. So while I would like to see this argument a bit more front and center in the national dialogue, I wonder if it would have any effect.