The media was pretty compliant when Bush/Cheney made the decision to invade and occupy Iraq after 911. Even though Iraq seems to be coming apart at the seams the media seems to be much less enthusiastic about intervention. The major theme is to ignore those who got us into the Iraq mess to begin with. Paul Waldman:
As you watch the debate on this issue, you should remind yourself that the most prominent voices being heard are the very ones who brought us the Iraq War in the first place, who promised that everything was simple and the only question was whether we’d be “strong” and “decisive” enough — the same thing they’re saying today. They’re the ones who swore that Saddam was in cahoots with Al Qaeda, that he had a terrifying arsenal of weapons of mass destruction, that the war would be quick, easy and cheap, that since Iraq was a largely secular country we wouldn’t have to worry about sectarian conflict, and that democracy would spread throughout the region in short order, bringing peace and prosperity along with it.
And this from Jesse Walker at Reason Magazine’s blog Hit and Run,
A man who owes his presidency to his opposition to the Iraq war is now pondering a new intervention in the same country. Some of his foremost critics think the president is being too cautious, even accusing him of “surrendering.” The debate over Iraq has gotten so risible that if Saddam Hussein were still alive, some hawks would probably be calling for Washington to “finish the job” by reinstalling him.
Now FOX news anchor Shepard Smith has a reputation for walking off from the Rupert Murdoch ranch this is still amazing:
“Are we about to be drawn back into a conflict in Iraq?” Smith asked. “The same people who 12 years ago told us this will be quick, this will be easy, this will be inexpensive, they will see us as liberators, it’s the right thing to do, are now telling us: It’s the right thing to do. What’s the endgame? Who’s thought this through?”