We all know at this point that our defense estimates on Iraq are quite dismal. This is why those on the left and even some on the right are pressuring the Bush administration to admit we have a serious problem on our hands right now so that we can begin to address what is an obvious failure. The word is, right now is the best we can expect as far as stability goes in Iraq...that's it...this is as good as it gets. Some feel that what really needs to happen and will happen is that the Iraqis will fight a civil war. The question is do we need to be there for it?

We are not fighting the "War on Terror" in Iraq. Our military is playing policeman there...this much has been admitted by defense analysts. So if even our Defense department knows we are not fighting the "War on Terror" there, what exactly are we doing there? Our presence there is not well thought of by the majority of Iraqi civilians. We are seen as more of a problem than an answer. The Bush administration admitted to not being able to broker a deal between the various factions there because they do not accept or trust us. We had to hand the ball to the UN and were desperate to do so leading up to the June 30 date.

The situation is things in Iraq are out of hand and the American government and military are seen as part of the problem...they don't want us there. Here's what we need to consider, many people feel we can't cut and run. That there is no way to back out of Iraq and basically look good doing it. The Bush administration has spun such a bizarre fairy tale about the place most Americans have no clue of the situation. The fact is we CAN get out of Iraq and we have many good reasons for doing so. Meaning if this administration had not spun this to seem like such a "had to go there it's part of the War on Terror" deal, we'd all have a better picture of what's happening. Americans are for the most part just confused as hell about it and for good reason. The administration has been spinning the situation for political purposes and the media have had their heads up their collective asses chasing stories about Viet Nam and the National Guard. All we hear are two stories on Iraq:

1. It's a quagmire. Which is true but leaves us feeling like we have no idea what to do. Which is not true.

2. That we are making progress and fighting the forces of evil there. Which is for the most part false. We are making no progress and progress is now out of our hands there because the Iraqis don't want to deal with us, it's the UN that's trying to make progress there. We are getting our soldiers killed by the "forces of evil" there but they are only in a position there now to play defense because we are no longer at war with Iraq. We are not "fighting the forces of evil there", our soldiers are just trying to defend themselves and innocent civilians. So, the Bush administration has handcuffed our military into the worst of all possible positions. Our soldiers can attack but only after people have been killed. Then we bomb the shit out of places with air strikes and kill more Iraqi civilians and the Iraqis continue to find us to be more and more like Saddam. This is a disaster for us on all fronts.

Here's the worst part of this and perhaps one of Bushco's greatest lies, they have known this for most of 2004 but because they are in an election year they have felt that what is politically best for them is to continue to tell the public that we are making progress...we are paying for this with the blood of our soldiers who they have handcuffed as sitting ducks.

Here's some things to consider. By all accounts the violence there is going to escalate. It likely will run in cycles of heavy violence with some lulls. Our military becomes more and more hated and despised there by the second. Iraq becomes a more dangerous place for civilians with each passing second we are there. We no longer have any negotiating leverage in Iraq, it's in the hands of the UN. We are now just a "peacekeeping" read "police" force there now. We are not fighting the "War on Terror" in Iraq. We do not have a "foothold" in the region there as many conservative boobs argue because we have no control over or say in what's happening in Iraq. You will not hear someone from the Bush White House say we have a "foothold in the region with our presence in Iraq"...because it would be a blatant lie that they have been advised is in no way possible. That's important for you conservative folks to pay attention to. You might hear conservative talk show hosts, or the odd Republican congressman say that...but nobody that's part of Bushco will say it. That foothold in the region stuff is a crock.

Now here's where it gets really bad. If we are there for another 5 years...which at this point seems very likely...the death toll of our soldiers will reach 10,000...maybe even more if all hell breaks loose which is a very real possibility. Now some may say that 10,000 seems high...really the number would be like 5000 at the going rate...that's not the situation though. The violence will escalate as Iraq moves toward it's most natural conclusion, civil war. So you have to ask, is it worth the lives of 10,000 soldiers to play sitting duck policeman in Iraq for 5 years? Which at this point probably seems like a short time when some folks are predicting we'll be there anywhere from 20 years to forever.

Now if we can dispel with all the partisan talk and arguing Iraq from political standpoints we could get to the bottom of this. This would also require us to forget the myths about Iraq, such as:

1. It gives us a foothold in the region. That is not true.

2. Iraq is part of the War on Terror. Also not true. It may have been promoted as such when Bushco argued the dangers of Saddam and his WMD stockpiles but neither of these exists in Iraq now.

3. Iraq will be taken over by the terrorists if we pull out. Again not true. Defense analysts do not see this as a likely scenario. What is more likely is there will be a civil war to prop up one of the fundamentalist religious leaders as the man in charge. 

4. By being in Iraq we have the terrorists "on the run." That is a giant fairytale.

Now, getting beyond all that we can begin to look honestly at our best options and what becomes our best option is to pull out our troops. Why you ask? Well, it's simple really. First, Iraq is no longer (if it ever was) a threat to the United States or an enemy to us. We are not at war with Iraq any longer. Second, we are not in control of determining Iraqs future because we are no longer part of the negotiating process, it's in the hands of the UN. Third, the Iraqis don't want us there. Fourth, our troops have been hung out to dry there with our current policy and are playing the role of sitting ducks. Fifth, Iraq needs to move to it's own inevitable conclusion and it's likely civil war will need to take place for that to happen. Having our troops there would only increase the death toll of such an event and increase the hatred toward us the entire Arab world feels, never mind what the Iraqi's already think. Sixth, pulling our troops out would put this right in the lap of the UN and then by default the international community. The fastest way for us to involve the rest of the world in the Iraq issue is to pull out our troops. We would at some point have to return but when we did so, it would be with a true coalition, not this half assed group we have now. Number seven, pulling out our troops would allow us to focus more on other more pressing issues in the "War on Terror". We would have a larger force we could deploy rapidly to hot spots of terrorist activity and to be able to respond to emergency situations. At the moment we're stretched thin and have all our eggs in the wrong basket.

There are of course issues with this idea. The Bush administration will not accept this course of action because it will make them look like total failures and go against all the nonsense they have been spewing. If Kerry laid this out as his plan, for political reasons Bushco would attack it and claim Kerry was "weak on terror" because he wanted to "give up" on Iraq. This would of course be total bullshit but Bushco is trying to make it a defining issue of the campaign that one of these guys is "tougher on terror"...which in truth is a ridiculous argument but that's politics. Also, we could piss off some foreign nations doing this because we'd be forcing them into helping out....that idea would likey not be lost on them.

Anyway, Kerry is not laying out a plan and the Bush plan is a joke. I think we have to blame all this on politics at the moment and nobody saying anything that might hurt their chances of getting elected. Sort of disgusting sure. The thing is I think it's more likely Kerry will move to do the right thing than it is Bushco will make a sudden and drastic change of direction...which would require admitting failure and give his critics plenty to chew on. I just think we have to forget the partisan arguments and do what's best for our troops and our country right now. That means getting out of Iraq and letting that nation reach it's own fate. It is the right thing to do all around and we can always go back to help them later and improve the situation. Right now it's a money pit for us and it's also being paid for in blood. It's money and blood not well spent.