A journalist named Byron York wrote this article entitled "Romney changes stance on Iraq." York writes for the Washington Examiner, a conservative counterpart to the Washington Post. As the title to the article indicates, York's thesis is that Romney changed his position on the war in Iraq over the course of a couple of interviews during the past week or two. (Instapundit links this article.)
But a careful reading of the article doesn't show the changes that York contends occurred. I find Romney's answers consistent and forthright about whether it would have been appropriate for our country to have have gone to war in Iraq had it had the proper intelligence concerning WMDs. Furthermore, his answers are valid.
What good is history if we don't learn from it?
The narrative of the war quickly turned to that of "nation-building" when our armies found no WMDs. The Constantinian idea of imposing a healthy national culture from the top down is more evidence that politicians ignore their history at the peril of the rest of us.