Beginning with its first line in this remarkable editorial. "It is time for the United States to leave Iraq without any more delay than the Pentagon needs to organize an orderly exit." the Times editorial advocates a precipitous withdrawal of American forces. It does so conceding that such a withdrawal is likely to increase the chaos and bloodshed in Iraq. not decrease it. and that a redeployment could prompt "reprisals. further ethnic cleansing. even genocide." A remarkable statement that a newspaper that frequently calls for the United States to bring its national power to bear for moral purposes. not the least of which in the Darfur region of Sudan. could so easily throw out consequences that are so terrible. In the opinion of the New York Times. apparently genocide is not worth fighting to prevent. nor is it worth fighting to prevent "potentially destabilizing refugee flows" hitting Jordan and Syria or to stop Iran from filling the power vacuum left behind by our departure or disrupting a likely terrorist sanctuary. No. none of these things are worth fighting for in the Times opinion because it has concluded that "keeping troops in Iraq will only make things worse." This misunderstanding clouds the entirety of the editorial. The Times appears to believe that because things have been mismanaged since 2003 and because violence remains at unacceptably high levels. things simply cant get worse. so we should withdraw and at least save ourselves.