Sorry Mike, but I feel I should correct a couple of your comments:

2) Don't forget the thousands who will be returning home with limbs missing. Or a piece of their heart. There was a story in the LA Times this morning about the Marine's slaughtering the civilians. A part of a team was involved in the slaughter. Another part was called in to clean it up and document it. One of the marines discussed coming in during the cleanup and picking up a child and watching her head slump back in his arms. He is back in the US. Understandbly, he is having trouble sleeping. His mom faults the US govt for offering little to no help for people like him, with debilitating mental issues.

3) Jake refuses to acknowledge this. As it will make his entire argument collapse. To him everything is great. On the radio today, they were discussing how people in Baghdad don't go out at night, don't hang out in large groups. A reporter in Baghdad said that today the city is one of the most dangerous in the world. Great way to have to live.

6) Most if not all of the experts whose story I've read say that the civil war began the minute Saddam was dethroned.

>This is exactly the kind of stuff the administration has been turning out for over three years now -- feel-good stories to distract us from the essential insanity of the Iraqi mission.
>
>Here are the "facts" in my view:
>
>1. We invaded Iraq (note that word carefully -- we have never before been unprovoked invaders) on the pretext that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. As someone or other memorably put it, so far we haven't found a firecracker.
>
>2. The lives of 2000 American soldiers, and counting, have been sacrificed. As have the lives of many more Iraqi soldiers and countless Iraqi citizens.
>
>3. Iraq is less stable and less safe now than it was when we invaded.
>
>4. Iran? North Korea? Osama? Sorry, we're busy.
>
>5. Anything we have been told about Iraq being on the cusp of self-rule is pure American spin. They aren't even close. The elected officials have no legitimacy and the "security forces" couldn't control a Brownie troop.
>
>6. Iraq will degenerate into religious civil war a nanosecond after we leave. That is immutable, whether we leave now or five years from now. In some ways the civil war is underway already. We just don't want to call it that.
>
>7. We will NEVER bring democracy to the Middle East. This is a "mission" that could only have been conceived by tone-deaf idealogues with no understanding of the region's history. There is no tradition of democracy whatsoever. And I highly doubt we are going to introduce it at gunpoint.
>
>8. The only reason we haven't left already is pride and an inability to admit we were wrong.
>
>This isn't partisan. I'm just as much a patriot as you are. I just think the Iraq episode has been a huge mistake, and one history will judge harshly.
>
>
>
>>For what its worth, Here's a story of an optimistic Iraqi woman.
>>http://www.opinionjournal.com/wsj/?id=110008440
>>
>>I suppose she's too naive also.
>>
>>>Jake,
>>>
>>>I can't tell you how offended I am by your belief that people want to see the US fail. You are so blinded by whatever juice you've drank that you feel the need to rationalize and frame everything like Fox news.
>>>
>>>You are so full of nieve optimism you fail to see the present. As if the parallels to Vietnam weren't obvious enough, we now have a full blown massacre.
>>>
>>>So everyone who believes that our occupation has emboldened the insurgency is wrong. Yet deaths continue to mount. As the deaths mount the call to withdrawl increases, yet because mine and others threshhold of acceptable deaths, for an unjust war is none, we are enemies of the state?
>>>
>>>You are a much, much bigger fool than I ever could have given you credit for.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>How about this: They most likely wanted to see a successful democratic government over there but believe that the admin running the show has botched it to the point of a hopeless impass. See? No WANT TO FAIL in the entire statement.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Most probably had this belief. If you're suggesting that no one wants to see the US fail then you are naive.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>NOBODY has been suggesting that "no one wants to see the US fail"
>>>>>
>>>>>What you are saying is that EVERYBODY who wants the US to leave Iraq WANTS to see the US fail.
>>>>>If that is what you believe then you are (pick the pejorative of your choice)
>>>>
>>>>Don't forget the word "immediately". As in "EVERYBODY who wants the US to leave Iraq immediately WANTS to see the US fail." Don't forget that this is my opinion based on my perception of the current status of the war. I see the fledgling Iraq government collapsing if the US immediately pulls out. If we hold on, and go through a gradual withdrawl for another year or so, while the Iraqi security forces take full control, then I think they have the best chance of success. Because of this belief I believe those advocating for immediate withdrawl are looking to "snatch defeat from the jaws of victory".