Well. I was remarking how many who are anti-left by default remark that rejecting the correctness of some of the Iraq invasion's different facets (it is not a war since war has never been declared - anyone who knows anything about warfare can tell you that not declaring war is a big mistake) and pointing out that the entire operation may be of little value to American interests could lessen troop morale and thus increase the so-called friction (a term coined by distinguished Prussian war philosopher Carl von Clausewitz, referring to the gulf between theory and practice, i.e. how many small practical mistakes, decreased morale and logistical inconsistencies in warfare can accumulate into a serious hampering of the war effort).
However, they never remark on how the lack of a post-invasion plan (benchmarks, I guess it's called now) and the dubious decisions to outsource many parts of the construction/logistics section of the invasion to wasteful corporations (this time the market produced more red tape than neoliberals could possibly fathom) is a far more serious endangering factor for American and British troops.
Also, the cheap Kuwait-based corporation assigned to build the American embassy in Baghdad treats the employees like slaves, while the freedom-loving executive branch complains about the Lancet study and Malkin laughs at Michael J. Fox for showing what happens when you have a somewhat common disease and can't afford expensive meds.