President Bush's decisions on Iraq have sparked broad consideration of the most important question facing America since the fall of the Berlin Wall: Shall we continue to fight the War on Terror?

The president's answer is a categorical yes. He believes correctly that failure in the Iraqi theater "is not an option," that failure to defeat jihadist terror in Iraq sooner or later will find the cutthroats on our shores - and better surely there than here.

Many in all the expected precincts disagree, from MoveOn.org to establishment repositories of opinion to the chardonnay-sipping armchair generals in the Democratic dovecote. Easy with blame for a president and his administration they never have liked, they say - let's see:

Our justifications for going into Iraq were everything from wrong to lies.

There was no end-game planning.

The al-Maliki government is incompetent and in cahoots.

The Iraqis neither desire democracy nor deserve it - and the Arab/Islamic world is so infertile that democracy cannot take root.

The Iraqis hate Americans.

We have no legitimate business in a civil war - least of all one we perpetrated and perpetuate by our very presence.

And so:

The only thing to do is pull chocks and bring the boys (and girls) home sooner than soon.

We may be in two Armageddons - one the conclusive annihilating conflict between Islam and the West so coveted by Osama and that ilk, the other the apocalyptic battle in this country over whether to sheath our weapons or fight. Continued...