More shrill by the day, the Globe's James Carroll is reaching new heights of hysteria. Hand it to Carroll - he decided that we shouldn't be going into Iraq, and By God, he's sticking to it. The more that events catch up to your editorial line, the more you have stomp your feet and wave your arms.

Someone should tell the Globe that providing their editorialists a forum for foot-stomping is at least unbecoming. Providing one for someone foot-stomping over the fact that we removed a murderous tyrrant is something worse.

Taking the accidental killing of 10 Iraqi policemen as his jump-off, Mr. Carroll begins by bordering on the incomprehensible:

I don't know what the hell that means, but it sounds terrible!

He goes on:

Outcome of Administration actions: Free-speech in Iraq, no more mass graves, no more payments to the families of suicide bombers...well, you get the picture. Outcome of Carroll prefered course: All of the above.

Ah yes, those volunteer hostages! I'm sure our military members and their families feel much better reading your columns, James. Just looking out for the troops, after all!

I skip the rest. Oh, except for this:

Now James, I already told you what you could do about that ennui!

The Carroll formula? Withdraw the troops now. Leave the Iraqis to themselves. Refuse any more funding...just say NO and pretend it was all a bad dream.

The moral bankruptcy of the Carroll position is profound. Regardless of one's view of the war, complete withdrawal at this moment is not an option, and his continued carping accomplishes nothing.

Remember Carroll's past editorials? The one's where he spent all that column real-estate asking question after question and never, you know...making a point? Well, he's finally come out and put forward his plan.

It's said there are no stupid questions, only stupid answers. James Carroll, go back to asking questions.