There is a joke where the optimist says "This is the best of all possible worlds" and the pessimist is afraid he is right.
So, how is the war in Iraq going? Is it even proper to call it a war anymore? Who are we at war with? I know that Bush says terrorists, but how do you have a war against terrorists? I guess it's pretty much the same as a war against poverty or a war against drugs. How are they doing? When will they end? Who's going to win - so far poverty and drugs are ahead!
We had a war against the Iraqi army. It went very quickly, actually much quicker than anyone really thought. We used an unexpected strategy of seizing high profile positions and staying out of the street-to-street fighting. That avoided the very high casualties that many predicted at the expense of anarchy breaking out. Would it have been better to go into the neighborhoods immediately? Maybe, or perhaps many thousands of American soldiers would have been killed and many more civilians. We could argue about this until the cows came home, but then we'd just have cattle in the kitchen.
Were there weapons of Mass Destruction? It doesn't look like it. I was rather surprised, but intelligence usually overestimates threats. Were they hidden/moved? Maybe, I kind of doubt it, but I suppose it's possible. This, frankly, isn't good. When you shoot the guy because he has a gun and he was just pulling out his wallet, it doesn't go down well. It is appropriate to hold those who made the decision accountable.
But now what? We broke it. Do we have to fix it? Can we just say "sorry" and dash out of the store? Personally, I think that as long as there is a chance we can put things into some semblance of order, it is our responsibility to do so. Is there such a chance?
Many commentators on this forum emphasize how bad things are going. They point, with what seems to me glee, at every casualty, every car bomb to emphasize that Bush is wrong and we should just leave. But I think they are caught up in their hatred for the Bush administration and would rather see thousands of Iraqi's die in a civil war then for Bush to be able to declare he was right. This is not a good basis for making decisions that will affect the future of literally millions of men, women and children. We need to be bigger than that as a people.
This is no longer about whether George Bush wins or loses. He's run for his last election. This is about whether the emerging, cobbled together, Iraqi government survives and evolves or descends into chaos. The insurgents are not heroes; they are a small minority trying to impose their philosophy by violence rather than by the ballot box. Let's not celebrate them.
Progress is being made. The constitution is flawed and seen as an American imposed structure. Ok. But unless you think that our immediate withdrawal will not be met with disorder, any orderly transition will have the taint of American imposition. This staged implementation slowly moves from a blatantly American government to one with more independence. This process will probably continue for years. Our own government had two constitutions, the second prepared virtually in secret and yet a third bill of rights attached before it passed. It took years. Why should the Iraqi process be over in six months? Or six years?
So, how long should we stay? So far, all of the announced steps have taken place pretty much on schedule and with less disruption than predicted. So long as that's continuing, I don't think we can, in good conscience, abandon the people who are counting on us. But pretty soon, the emerging Iraqi government is going to have to ask the occupying troops to leave - and I suspect they will as soon as they don't expect immediate assassination.
Personally, I expect to see significant troop withdrawals by the summer - in time for the 2006 mid-term elections. When will we completely leave? When will we leave Germany?
Is this the best of all possible worlds? I don't think so. Is it the worst? I'm sure not.