Comments: What's interesting to you?

" He advances the astonishing theory (also linking to Matt Yglesias) that maybe the invasion of Iraq was doomed from the start and would have been doomed, regardless of who was leading it."

I forget if Marshall initially supported the invasion. Those of us who did are left to wonder if it would have gone better with better leadership. I honestly thought Blair was going to play a larger role in shaping post-War Iraq, and I trusted Blair much more than I trusted Bush. Still do.

Posted by Lawrence Krubner at October 12, 2005 02:12 PM

I think Marshall supported is...conditionally.

(Those of us who never supported it at all would like those of you who supported it to understand that there was almost no conceivable way it would have turned out any differently. Marginally better in some ways, with more competent, more honest leadership, yes, but more competent, more honest leadership would have invaded a tiny, nonagressive country even if it was making rude faces at us.)

Posted by Anne at October 13, 2005 10:46 AM