All right, Mr. President. Let’s ignore the vapid, matted-haired peaceniks whose anti-Americanism is so reflexive and ingrained that they’d sooner cook Osama bin Laden a vegan meal than countenance hunting him in Afghanistan. And let’s forget about your creepy "chicken hawk" plotters who are so fixated, so obsessed with sending low-income 19-year-olds to die in combat even though they themselves craftily eluded conscription a generation ago. Both of these groups are immaterial now. Because, like many other spoiled children, you’ve complained and fussed and hectored for so long that it looks like you’ll finally get the war you want so badly.

But, Mr. President, leaving aside the fact that you still haven’t given us a cogent argument as to why we need to do this now, please answer this question instead: then what do we do?

Because no one in your administration has offered anything more than boilerplate bromides when confronted with explaining what exactly the plan is once the military campaign is over (it should be relatively quickly, we’re told) and Saddam Hussein is gone. It’s not because no one is asking.

What sort of government will you install in Baghdad? You’ll have to do it quickly. Who will it be? The Iraqi National Congress or other exile groups? The US by proxy? Somebody like the shah? (Or like Saddam used to be?) I read an Associated Press report about some plans in the works to "use American and other foreign troops as a stabilizing force until a new government is formed." ("The United States will not cut and run," assures Ari Fleischer.) But what exactly does that mean?

And what about the myriad other hurdles after that? Iraq’s enormous debt? Internecine squabbling and vendettas among the country’s fractious ethnic groups? Iraq’s nervous neighbors? What about tending to the injured and destitute? Food, medicine, education? I remember how you used to jeer at "nation-building." Can I believe someone’s mind changes so quickly? Or do you plan to palm that yucky stuff off on the UN? (An organization that’s worth something sometimes.)

It just seems like you’re putting the cart before the proverbial horse. You’re very intent on disarming and dethroning Saddam, that much is abundantly clear. But I’ve seen very little evidence of serious, specific thought about the whole range of responsibilities that will arise after we’ve "won." How much have you pondered what happens next? In the November Atlantic Monthly, James Fallows wrote a cover story called "The Fifty-first State?" that deals with "the inevitable aftermath of victory in Iraq." Did you read it? In researching the piece, Fallows consulted with "spies, Arabists, oil-company officials, diplomats, scholars, policy experts, and many active-duty and retired soldiers." Have you? Or have you talked only with Richard Perle?

I’m not saying the challenge we face is impossible. Nor — I feel compelled to spell out — am I saying I’m against it out of hand. I just wish you’d be a little more forthcoming about how, specifically, you plan to tackle it. I keep hearing Paul Wolfowitz talk about this shining beacon of Iraqi democracy, the cornerstone of a new Middle East, that will rise from the ashes of Baghdad when the smoke finally clears. Of course I hope it does. I’m sure the Iraqi people do too. But what if they elect someone you don’t like?

At the very least, you know all this will be extraordinarily expensive. You seem very willing to go to war alone; are you equally willing to shoulder the financial imperatives of reconstruction? In this economic climate? Without raising taxes? Do the American people know about this?

Yes, we did the brunt of the work in refashioning Germany and Japan in our image after World War II. But we did have some help. And it took a lot of time and a lot of money. But look what we’ve done on other occasions. We routed the Soviets from Afghanistan. Then we "cut and ran." Look what happened next.

Mr. President, all I’m saying is this: your guys are very good at leaking war plans to the papers. Let’s see them leak some reconstruction plans. Because we can’t afford to make this up as we go along. Not now.

Back to the Thoughts on going to war index.