...this makes sense.

I'll have to think about it more before I decide whether - assuming the story is true - the reasoning here is good enough to justify Obama's eventual decision, but on first glance I'd say that when the prime minister of Iraq warns that "Baghdad will burn", and you're sitting thousands of miles from Baghdad and he's not, maybe you believe him.

I know that a lot of the discussion following the reversal centered around whether we give Obama the benefit of the doubt too easily, and I found myself beginning to lean towards the "yes, we do" side of things. I'd hate to make the mistake of jumping back in with both feet, but "Baghdad will burn" is more compelling than yowling noise about supporting the troops.