Questioning Tactics

War opponents (old and new) constantly are questioning the tactics of war supporters and the war architects. Let me turn the tables for a moment. Why do all war opponents make it about Bush? Don't they know that is a divisive tactic? (I will grant that Bush and Rove do the same) Who do they hope to win over to their side by attacking Bush?

Surely, it doesn't help with the Bush supporters. And it certainly doesn't help with people like me. I just start zoning out the minute someone goes on a personal rant about Bush. I don't even like the guy, but it makes me like the arguer less.

Why not just make the point: look, there aren't any good guys to support in Iraq. There is no side to fight on that is significantly better than the other. We're just choosing one group of non-democratic thugs over another. That is a winning argument, if it is true. But is it true? Do war opponents think it is true? I suspect they don't. If they did, the prior argument is sufficient. Instead, they insist Bush lied or he betrayed us and get into all this nonsense...and it makes me think they speaking emotionally and not rationally. And that's fine, just don't expect it to be persuasive.