The Democrats in Congress apparently ">">https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-US-Iraq.html?ref=washington"> cannot.

Steve Thomas, I think I am "thinking" and not just "feeling", but this matter of Democrats pushing for a loss in Iraq seems irresponsible. I suppose the point of the Ceaser article is that they can be irresponsible in Congress as the buck does not stop there.

It is especially important not to demand defeat when victory might be possible. is just what seems to be happening with this military funding fight.

If non-funding the war is meant to ensure defeat before the election, then the next president would have to deal with the international repercussions of our loss, whatever those might be. If Democrat, as head of the party in favor of loss, that might seem like an ideal position from which to withdraw from the world stage as THE major player. Would we be wanting to project weakness as a diplomatic strength? Somehow that would be a good thing? It nauseates me. A Republican president would have a much harder time with foreign policy, an impossible time if the Democrats retain the Congress. To undermine the executive in the area of foreign policy seems like a horrible idea to me.

Please, someone tell me how wrong I am.

To undermine the executive in the area of foreign policy seems like a horrible idea to me.

Yes. That was my point, too.