I guess Ellen needs the moral clarity of a Bill Clinton.

It is not nice to pick on an airheaded girl. She is handicapped.

So, if you are to be considered ENLIGHTENED you should think that what we are doing in Iraq is immoral.

What an utterly clueless idea! As if we were raping and pillaging.

I wasn't able to see the clip of the Ratner/Pinkerton segment so I'm wondering.. didn't Pinkerton challenge Ratner on this point?

I think it would be a good idea for someone to establish a quick reference, documented database of all the successes we have had in Iraq. Forget that we have prevailed in virtually all the military engagements in which we've been involved but instead just focus on human service type accomplishments dealing with the basics, such as energy supply, water supply, clinics/hospitals, law enforcement, food markets, schools, and so on.

I'd like to see a headline update each day as a part of this web accessible database that would give objective, measurable updates: Water treatment facilities reopened and/or newly built, hospitals reopened and/or newly built.. same for schools, libraries, etc., and have this information updated each day on this website so that it can become something that everybody knows. You know, kind of like the lies that liberals spew all the time - repeated often enough people tend to believe it, true or not. If it can work for them why couldn't the conservative side do the same - but using the truth! Just a thought.

In any case, in what sense does Ratner believe that our involvement in Iraq deprives us of the moral standing to stand up to Putin? We can debate the merits of the Iraq war, but few would question it was done, even if mistakenly, for morally defensible reasons - a combination of national security and a desire to promote democracy in the Middle East.

The fact is that people like Ratner never believe the US has the moral authority to criticize other countries.  They just use the latest or biggest headline as the reason.  Today, it's the war in Iraq (Why not Afghanistan, too?).  More often, it's the execution of a death sentence, or a "hate crime," or corporate greed, etc.

That Ratner can believe with 100% certainty that Putin's regime poisoned Litvinenko, yet feel that we don't have the moral standing to criticize Putin, than she is a fool.

"......we don't have the moral standing given what we're doing in Iraq."

The only thing missing from this Ratner nonsense was the sound of ominous organ music indicating more trouble ahead.

Not; 'America doesn't have the moral standing because we kill our unborn', or 'America has a few people in black robes that take it upon themselves to legislate perverse same-sex marriage or legislate some imaginary government right to take away someone's private  land to give to another private citizen', or 'we have Representatives at all levels of our Government that commit all sorts of heinous acts from driving female "assistants" to their death to lying to grand juries', etc.  No, it's "what we're doing in Iraq".  It would be nice if Ratner had explained to viewers why our moral standing was just as dismal even before we liberated Iraq.  Unless the 911 Islamic radicals had some sort ot futuristic time machine, I don't think their view of America's sub-par "moral standing" had anything to do with Iraq.

Yet again, one more lib like Ratner demonstrates the left is more interested in fabricating straw men to continue their perverse social goals rather than pursuing the best interests of America and the world.

Prior to America liberating Iraq, one could find hate-speech directed at Americans (that would be the "great satan") and other freedom-loving peoples on every major media in the Middle East and many in Europe every single day of the year.  Not simply a heated opinion piece questioning policy, but an all out Hitleresque call for annihilation of not just Americans, but every person that doesn't believe what radical Isam believes - be that person a fellow Muslim, Jew, Christian, Buddhist, whatever.  This hate is daily spewed from white-turbaned immans with golden tongues and black hearts. It is taught from school books starting in grade one.  It is fervently defended at the family dinner table.  This radical Islamic hate has been out of control for decades.  It has nothing to do with Iraq and everything to do with appeasement - most apparent in America's entrenched media.

America's entrenched media have painted themselves in a corner.  They cannot report on this long-standing radical Islamic hatred of everyone in the world that holds a differing opinion without admitting they have been wrong all along about Iraq.  In doing so they would be compelled to support the opportunity provided by our liberation of Iraq in developing a major player (country/government) that will not tolerate hate speech (like the left was so eager to do here in America) or the Islamic radical deliverers of that hate speech, which in turn could spread to other countries in the Middle East.  Doing so would be tantamount to admitting they were wrong about Iraq.  There are far more moderate Muslims than radical Muslims in the world.  Yet, because of fear of reprisal and/or the refusal of any effective media outlet here in the US to give them a voice to condemn radical Islamists the voice of moderate Muslims is not heard.  It is not that the entrenched media does not understand the seriousness of the radical Islamic threat or sympathetic to the plight of moderate Muslims.  It is just that the entrenched media's quest for a progressive lifestyle trumps the security interests of the world.  It would be easier for a radical Islamist terrorist to share pork with a Jew at a convent on Christmas morning than the entrenched media to admit they were wrong about Iraq.  We could possibly soon be a witness to the fall of the developed world based solely on the immalleable pride of the American establishment media.