The New York Times is embarked on a major campaign to "Save Iraq". It has, in fact, undertaken this task in order to "Save The Democrat Party".
The liberals have concluded that the Democrat Party cannot effectively attack either President Bush nor the GOP if the country is at war with Iraq. Ergo, the liberals will do whatever it takes to keep such a war from happening.
If that means trying to convince the public that such a war would be ill-advised, so be it.
If that means trying to convince the administration that such a war would be politically costly, so be it.
If that means betraying the U.S. war plans to Saddam Hussein, so be it.
In the mind of the New York Times and the mainstream media, if there is a war with Iraq, the biggest losers will be the Democrats. Therefore, the war cannot be allowed to happen -- and the Times has set about trying to thwart it.
Friedman's column is simply the "flavor of the day" in what will be an ongoing effort to "Save Iraq".
Thank you for your well written and informative reply. I sensed something of the sort, but your concise explanation really brought the pieces together.