An e-mail:

You quoted McCain as saying, “Before I left for Iraq, I watched with regret as the House of Representatives voted to deny our troops the support necessary to carry out their new mission. Democratic leaders smiled and cheered as the last votes were counted. What were they celebrating? Defeat? Surrender? In Iraq, only our enemies were cheering.” It’s worth contrasting that with Giuliani’s position:
But in discussing the deployment of more troops, Mr.Giuliani has been alone in saying that such a strategy may not succeed, potentially providing him cover should the situation in Iraq deteriorate further. And he has put the strategy in a broader context that plays down the importance of Iraq. Terrorists “are going to continue to be at war with us, no matter what the outcome in Iraq,” Mr. Giuliani said recently in New Hampshire. The night before, he said that “there are no sure things, “and that if the United States fails in Iraq, “we have to be ready for that, too.” In California a few days later, speaking of “the danger of focusing on Iraq too much,” he said that complete success there would not win the fight against terrorism, and that failure there would not lose it. Giuliani has a hawkish image which does not seem to be entirely deserved.

ME: Well, nothing Giuliani said is necessarily objectionable on the merits, but I take your point: he is providing himself more wiggle room than McCain. Romney is basically striking the same tone as Giuliani, by the way.