As a starting point, the “debate”, which I missed as it’s still too early to bother, in my opinion The No Kool Aid Zone (this refers to comments between Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee):
As Mike said, we can leave for the historians the question of whether or not we should have gone in. But now that we’ve “broken it”, we have to fix it, and our honor is more important than Republicans winning elections. Yes, Mike, yes, 1000 times yes!
If you want to know why none of the top Democrat candidates want to come out full ahead with the “withdraw” from Iraq categorically, read Albion’s Seed: Four British Folkways in America and realize that the two major “folkways” of Mr Fischer, the Southern and Backcountry, still influence American south and withdrawal is a matter of honor and pride. A categorical withdrawal means punting in the Southeast and that segment throughout the country. No serious politician gives up such a large sector that lightly.
Communism showed us there are things worth fighting against. Life as dhimmi is another.
In 674, Byzantium resisted Islam in a crucial battle/seige four year which was the first major setback of three which halted the 7th and 8th century tide of Arab Islam (a second battle with Byzantium was the 2nd and Charles Martel at Tours was the third). A candidate who suggests that Iraq in 2008 be the first major setback for the West be voluntarily us (or the US) without first/also suggesting an aggressive strategy for addressing and confronting Islamic fundamentals will lose faith with a large voting bloc.