WaPo: The Good, the Bad, Then a Different Good Again

By James Fallows

Admirable/good: The Post's columnist David Ignatius (disclosure: a very long-time close friend) begins a column today forthrightly saying that he regrets having supported the invasion of Iraq ten years ago:

Ten years ago this week, I was covering the U.S. military as it began its assault on Iraq. As I read back now over my clips, I see a few useful warnings about the difficulties ahead. But I owe readers an apology for being wrong on the overriding question of whether the war made sense.

Invading Iraq to topple Saddam Hussein a decade ago was one of the biggest strategic errors in modern American history.
We shouldn't overlook what it takes to write something this direct. One indication is its rarity: think of the other people who might have said something similar, and didn't. Which brings us to:

Less admirable/bad: The Post's editorial page, which 10 years ago, under the same leadership as today, was one of the most impassioned voices about the need to invade, has so far not ventured one word about how it looks back on that all-in bet.

Back to the good: OK, this is on an entirely different scale, but I can't help but be excited by the Post's Beer Madness bracket: a showdown of local D.C.-based beers.

Thumbnail image for Beers2.jpg

I've filled out my bracket and will watch to see if the expert panel makes the right choices.

Seriously, very gutsy column by David Ignatius.

This article available online at:

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/03/wapo-the-good-the-bad-then-a-different-good-again/274252/