derailed in what way? politically, yes. many of us were screaming about that here for a year - don't send the president out to talk about SS reform 50+ times while the media was busy defining the terms of the war, running only negative stories, and taking 30 points off public approval for it. so if that is what you mean by "derailed", I agree.
but with respect to the effort in iraq, about taking the fight to the terrorists in their own backyard, then I would not use the term "derailed". there have been problems, iraq forces slow to come up to speed, but things are hardly coming off the rails. nobody "likes the war" and likes to see dead american soldiers, but we still lost most americans in an hour on 9-11 then we have in this war.
if we lose this war - we lose more then just iraq, we will have shown ourselves to be so dumbed down as a people that we cannot even muster the courage to use our own military to defend ourselves - and this war against islamofascism is just starting. just ask France.
That is exactly what I meant, and you posters were right on the money. It's probably too much to expect to have everything perfect at home and on abroad, but when you have a war going on, there is nothing more important than American lives, you know?
But no, I don't think Iraq is derailed (though the media would have you think otherwise). Mark Steyn had a great article recently--the terrorist attacks are getting farther and farther away from the core... they are being marginalized.
I'll I'm saying is that when the WH doesn't fight back and lets the other side control the debate, it is not good.
I have a feeling we'd agree on this. :)