The next step

Serious men.

Mr. Bush's first challenge if he proposes a surge will consequently be to convince the country that the fresh troops would have a vital and achievable mission. Those who have been arguing for the move -- notably, Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.) -- say the purpose would be to pacify those sectors of Baghdad where sectarian fighting has been most intense. They argue that the main U.S. goal in Iraq, which is to forge a stable and sustainable government, can't be achieved unless there is a minimal level of security in the capital. The Iraqi army isn't yet able to impose order, they say; if the United States doesn't do it, the sectarian warfare will continue to escalate. Without a surge, Mr. McCain and Mr. Lieberman warn, the war will be lost.

This is a serious argument, and the two senators have been principled and even courageous in making it.

Who "can't contemplate the next step."

Finally, a questioner lays it all on the line: "The war's the big issue," he says, adding, "Some kind of disengagement—it's going to have to happen. It's a big issue for you, for our party, in 24 months. It's not that long a time." McCain replies, "I do believe this issue isn't going to be around in 2008. I think it's going to either tip into civil war … " He breaks off, as if not wanting to rehearse the handful of other unattractive possibilities. "Listen," he says, "I believe in prayer. I pray every night." And that's where he leaves his discussion of the war this morning: at the kneeling rail.

On the way to our next stop, McCain tells me, "It's just so hard for me to contemplate failure that I can't make the next step."

Look, it is hard to criticize McCain on this issue given that it may very well be his own son paying the price of escalation. Unlike the president, he understands the notion of sacrifice. But at the root of the McCain and Lieberman stance is not "principle" or courage. Their calls for escalation, knowing that the call is three years too late and that Bush on Wednesday will likely unveil "a plan" that will likely be too small to make a difference but perhaps large enough to please Bill Kristol, mask what should be the real debate: how do we do the least harm when pulling out of the massive strategic mistake that is our presence in Iraq? They can't cop to the fact that they supported that strategic mistake or that they never contemplated that that strategic mistake would end in quagmire.