Tom Friedman, representing the New York Times position, argues for total and immediate withdrawal as a way of cutting our losses. Stephen Biddle, on the other hand, argues for staying the course. Both agree that the middle ground of a small force is unfeasible. Adesnik's position? He is not yet convinced that the cause is lost and argues that total withdrawal will produce:
Another Darfur and another Saigon. A moral failure and an epic humiliation. That is the cost of surrender.I agree with him.