Watching a bunch of talking heads on FOX debate the Iraq Study group is nothing short of hilarious. I see one guy from NPR and then Chris Wallace, Brit Hume, and Bill Kristol spouting talking points ad nauseum. But there’s one thing I just heard that I’d like to highlight because I hear it a lot.

Bill Kristol popped this beauty out: “The president is going to have to decide between victory and withdrawal.” That is the neoconservative viewpoint at this time. Any plan for withdrawal means failure. We cannot leave period because leaving means surrender. But they keep saying that we can leave after we win. So we can leave after we win, but leaving means we lose. Brilliant.

I don’t understand how the Iraq debate can be had when withdrawal is completely off the table to one side. Brit even had the audacity to insult those who want to force a timely exit to this war. There’s this Bizarre-o Land discussion happening on the right that says “sure we’d love them out next week, but we have to win!” as though we can’t help this process along. That we just have to wait until victory falls in our laps and THEN we can worry about getting out of there.

The left, or at least I, want to force the best possible conclusion to this war and then leave. The right is holding out for the sweets and flowers ending where everyone bands together and has tea parties while celebrating Ramadannukah.