The Fire Last Time

ADVOCATES of a war on Iraq can be forgiven for some exasperation with the doves’ demands for a debate. For one thing, these demands often serve as a substitute for their actually engaging in it by taking a clear position. For another, the hawks tend to think that we already had this debate—twelve years ago. James Robbins recently wrote on National Review Online: “The same [antiwar] points are being made today as [in] 1990, frequently by the same people.” The doves made fools of themselves then with predictions of military disaster; why should their counsel be sought now?

Robbins has the critics dead to rights. Many of the antiwar arguments really are remarkably similar: The Iraqi army

About the Author

Ramesh Ponnuru

Ramesh Ponnuru is the editor of National Review, a columnist for the Washington Post, and a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.

Featured Tags

ADVOCATES of a war on Iraq can be forgiven for some exasperation with the doves’ demands for a debate. For one thing, these demands often serve as a substitute for their actually engaging in it by taking a clear position. For another, the hawks tend to think that we already had this debate—twelve years ago. James Robbins recently wrote on National Review Online: “The same [antiwar] points are being made today as [in] 1990, frequently by the same people.” The doves made fools of themselves then with predictions of military disaster; why should their counsel be sought now?

Robbins has the critics dead to rights. Many of the antiwar arguments really are remarkably similar: The Iraqi army