The Times acted to conceal Russian atrocities (Duranty), downplayed the Holocaust as it was occurring, regarded the U.S. and Soviet regimes as morally equivalent (at best), is sympathetic to the exterminationist Palestinian mindset, exposed secret security programs—did you really think they might act in a different way now?

Fine piece by Mr. Hanson. There's just a great many of us out here for whom the NYT has become solidly, and irreversibly, irrelevant.

The U.S. defeat occurred the instant we invaded a sovereign country that posed no threat to our security. It worsened when the occupation began, and the Bremer administation outlawed local administration, allowed munitions stores to be pilfered, and refused to work with tribal leaders to repair the damage.

Your detailed counterargument to the NY Times nothwithstanding, the occupation of Iraq is a gigantic foreign policy failure, contrary to modern American tradition, except for possibly the occupation of the Philippines, which took place to establish a colonial empire.

After four years of tactical errors, enormous human and financial cost, and strategic shortsightedness, the process of withdrawal is long overdue. The NY Times solution may not be the best, and the congressional process certainly is problematic, but a long term occupation of Iraq complete with a "Forbidden City" embassy compound and enormous military bases will not resolve the Iraq problem. The Bush administration made the mess and the American people are calling for anyone possible to fix it.

Those whom the gods would destroy, they first make readers of the New York Times.

You may want to consider fact-checking some of the people you referred to as "politicians and pundits" who supported the Iraq War. I would be shocked if you could produce any evidence amongst the congressional testimony, and countless TV appearances of retired general Wesley Clark where he did anything but oppose the war from the very beginning. If you are privy to such information, I would appreciate it if you would share it.