Roommate and TNR superstar Spencer Ackerman describes the Other Vietnam Syndrome:

It’s true enough that, for more than 30 years, the left has not infrequently suffered from “Vietnam syndrome”–the assumption that any military engagement will be a moral disaster and a potential quagmire. But, though it has been less examined, the lesson the right took from Vietnam–that the true danger to national security is not misguided wars, but overzealous opposition to misguided wars–is, if anything, more dangerous. Call it the Other Vietnam Syndrome.

Read the whole thing, as the kids say. I actually think there’s also a third Vietnam Syndrome, but that’s a story for another day.

I’m at Princeton talking about national security with various people smarter and more distinguished than myself. At the moment the topic on the table is John Ikenberry’s contention (also made by others) that the whole “war on terrorism” concept ought to be junked. I have genuinely mixed feelings about this; hoping to learn something from the assembled guests, but also would be interested to know what readers think.

“Whenever people asked me how I’d know if we’d won in Iraq,” writes Tom Friedman, “I said: when Salman Rushdie could give a lecture in Baghdad.”

Really? That was his criterion for victory? And he thought the war was a good idea? And he’s the country’s most-influential foreign affairs columnist? I’d best just stop reading things. Picked up (or, rather, stole from my roommate) White Noise on the advice of commenters — that’s a much more palatable brand of surrealism.