A bankruptcy of logic

Of all the people complaining about President Obama's Afghan war escalation, Tom Friedman takes the cake:

Iraq was about "the war on terrorism." The Afghanistan invasion, for me, was about the "war on terrorists." To me, it was about getting bin Laden and depriving Al Qaeda of a sanctuary—- period. I never thought we could make Afghanistan into Norway-— and even if we did, it would not resonate beyond its borders the way Iraq might.

To now make Afghanistan part of the "war on terrorism"—- i.e., another nation-building project-— is not crazy. It is just too expensive...

(Here is his Op-Ed in the New York Times).

So, let me get this straight: the war in Iraq, launched on false premises and so badly executed, was a necessary nation-building project? And the war in Afghanistan, being escalated by Obama precisely to help "get Bin Laden and depriving Al Qaeda of a sanctuary" is too expensive? This doesn't make any sense.

I think I prefer the knee-jerk anti-war crowd to this kind of sophistry. At least the anti-war people are consistent.