Latest Issue

No bloodbath in Iraq

The Iraq war was based on a false "best case." Now the argument for staying is based on a false "worst case"

By Robert Dreyfuss   April 2007

The Bush administration famously based its argument for invading Iraq on best-case assumptions: that the US would be greeted as liberators; that a capable democratic government would quickly emerge; that our military presence would be modest and temporary; and that Iraqi oil revenues would pay for everything. All these assumptions, of course, turned out to be wrong.

Now many of the same people who pushed for the invasion are arguing for escalating US military involvement based on a worst-case assumption: that if America leaves quickly, the apocalypse will follow. “How,” asked Robert Kagan and William Kristol in the Weekly Standard,…

Register today to continue reading

You’ve hit your limit of three articles in the last 30 days. To get seven more, simply enter your email address below.

You’ll also receive our free e-book Prospect’s Top Thinkers 2020 and our newsletter with the best new writing on politics, economics, literature and the arts.

Prospect may process your personal information for our legitimate business purposes, to provide you with newsletters, subscription offers and other relevant information.

Click here to learn more about these purposes and how we use your data. You will be able to opt-out of further contact on the next page and in all our communications.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to

More From Prospect