Thomas Friedman is an arrogant ignoramus, Part 5: "they want a presidential candidate who is serious about fighting the war against the Islamist totalitarianism threatening open societies
...
Without a serious Democratic critique of the war — and I define "serious" as one that connects with the gut middle-American feeling that the Islamist threat had to be confronted"

This guy is supposed to be the "paper of record"'s expert on the Middle East, yet seems unaware that Hussein's Iraq was

1. Most definately not Islamist.


2. Not a threat to its neighbors let alone the US

Mr. Friedman. Repeat after me.
"Iraq did not have WMD"
"Iraq was not an Islamist state"
"Iraq was not a threat"
"I will read the news and the history books"