Both sides in the Iraq debate tend to ignore, or downplay, the downside to their preferred course of action. On Meet the Press, New York Times columnist David Brooks put the dilemma that both sides need to address:
Personally, I think having gone in there in the first place the Coalition has a moral obligation to see it through. But I expect that mine is a minority opinion.
So are we willing to prevent 10,000 Iraqi deaths a month at the cost of 125 Americans? That's a tough moral issue, but it's also a tough national interest issue because we don't know what the consequences of getting out are. And the frustration of watching the debate in Washington, very few people are willing to, to grapple with those two facts, that there's--that the surge will not work in the short-term, but getting out will be cataclysmic. And you see politicians on both sides evading one of those two facts. But you've got to grapple with them both.