Are we so shallow that we've already moved on from the incredibly difficult issue that polarized this nation - the war in Iraq?
The national elections occurred in Iraq more than four months ago, and few Americans really paid much attention. Those who had some interest likely made a note that the event occurred, felt satisfied that something good may have occurred in this mess that we created, and then moved on to the next national item of interest (immigration, health care, Afghanistan, and so on). I believe that most folks missed one little problem that occurred in the election process - no clear majority party won the election, which means that those who fared well in the elections must secure support from those who didn't do well in order to gain sufficient votes to obtain a majority.
Is anyone concerned that four months have passed since the election occurred in Iraq and still no government exists? I believe that we ought to be concerned about this. America (and the few allies that we have left in Iraq) are significantly reducing troop strength and turning over governmental authority to the Iraqis leaders who are unable to form a government.
So what are some problems with this issue that I raised?
If the Iraq project implodes then America is seen as having broken Iraq, set the conditions for its restoration as a state, and then failed to complete the task. I'll call this the "Red Zone" analogy (borrowed from football). If America can't get the Iraqi government through the red zone and into the end zone then America looks like it can't finish the task that it started - is this the reputation that we want the most powerful country in the world to portray?
I see another problem with Iraq not having a formed government in that the country has been under totalitarian control for at least the previous 40 year (maybe longer). The population and political elite have no idea what good government looks like and how it ought to perform. Since Saddam's demise, numerous strong-men have emerged, and I don't see any of them seeking an improvement to the common good of the country; rather I see them building power and lining their pockets. Is this the example of the democracy that we want to blossom in the Middle East? Looks more like totalitarian corruption.
Finally, I see a problem in Iraq's immediate vicinity. Iran has interests in manipulating Iraq, how about Syria, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia? With Iraq vulnerable and the US quickly departing, one doesn't have to be too cynical to see that Iraq's neighbors are watching this situation closely and scheming to put themselves in a position of advantage. Is it America's desire to wave at the Iranians, Syrians, or Jordanians who are entering Iraq as we are high-tailing out?
America's recent actions with the Iraq subject provide a message that is becoming very clear: we conquered Saddam; we misread the nature of the insurgency, but eventually "the surge" worked; Iraq held its national elections without too returning to civil war; and now its time to put a check in the "W" column -- woo hoo, we're done here.
Call me cynical, but I'm not convinced that we've finished...
Note: I thank all of you in advance for your contributions. I'll provide a synthesis of all the comments and 'my take' on this in a few days.