David Broder has his priorities in order:

It is evident from the length of this deliberative process and from the flood of leaks that have emerged from Kabul and Washington that the perfect course of action does not exist. Given that reality, the urgent necessity is to make a decision — whether or not it is right.

Matthew Yglesias can’t believe Broder actually means that:

[A]gain, this is one of these moments when you wonder what the editors of newspaper opinion sections are for. Surely this would have been a good opportunity for someone to say “David, you don’t really mean that do you?”

Why patronize Broder, though? You sign your name on something you write, so you’re responsible for its presentation. We can never know what Broder thinks. But we know what he’ll put under his byline. The column makes perfectly clear that Broder has little perspective on what the right course for U.S. strategy in Afghanistan actually is. It’s evidently not a question that concerns him so greatly. What does principally concern him is that a process resolve itself.

It’s hard for thinking people to accept that a choice necessarily entailing the deaths of many people ought to be divorced from its content for the sake of an outwardly-appearing orderly process. But there are people who disagree. We shouldn’t presume that they don’t mean what they say.