Andrew Sullivan notes that Daniel Drezner has written a good round up of much better critique of President Bush’s handling of foreign policy than has come out of any of the Democratic party stalwarts. Drezner concludes that
In many ways, Bush’s supporters have devised a more powerful critique than anything Bush’s opponents have come up with.
I have to agree with that, and it’s interesting to ask why. It is, in my view, because these critics want Bush to succeed. They agree with his basic policy but think that it could be better done. It’s the kind of criticism one gives a friend, not an enemy. As Drezner notes, it concentrates on actual facts and presents detailed alternative actions that could be taken (the most common being “make examples for the encouragement of others”). This is how one criticizes without being disloyal.