>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.

This was an Iraqi, not a part of the Bush administration. Is it incomprehensible to you that an Iraqi could possibly be opptimistic?

>
>Here are the "facts" in my view:
>
>1. We invaded Iraq (note that word carefully -- we have never before been unprovoked invaders)

I guess the following doesn't count as provokation?
-Daily attacks on our aircraft patroling the no-fly zones
-Support for terrorists who attack our ally (Israel)
-Attempted assassination of a former President

>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.

We went to war for many reasons. They are outlined in the "Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq". Continuing to sight one reason doesn't make the others any less legitimate. The authorization was passed by both houses of Congress and signed by the President, as is constitutionally required.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021002-2.html

>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.

I wouldn't use the word sacrifice, but that's neither here nor there.

>
>3. Iraq is less stable and less safe now than it was when we invaded.

Baghdad is less stable and less safe now than it was when we invaded. - fact
The southern marsh area is more safe now than it was when we invaded. - fact
The northern Kurdish area is more safe now than it was when we invaded. -fact

>
>4. Iran? North Korea? Osama? Sorry, we're busy.
Iran - in progress - fact
North Korea - Multilateral diplomacy - fact
Osama - We should've got him at Tora Bora. - my opinion

>
>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.

Let me get this straight, America is spinning when they point out the Iraqi elections, but you're not spinning when you say it isn't close?

Just to be clear. These are not facts these are your opinions.

>
>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.

Now you've moved from opinion to speculation

>In some ways the civil war is underway already. We just don't want to call it that.

This is also a matter of opinion. I've heard arguments for both. My personal opinion is that a civil war is not underway because the sectarian violence is so concentrated in the center of the country, with very isolated incidents in the northern and southern provinces.

>
>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.

This is another opinion.

>There is no tradition of democracy whatsoever. And I highly doubt we are going to introduce it at gunpoint.

There was no tradition of democracy in many parts of the world, before democracy took hold. Why not in the middle east? "Those people" can't do it?

>
>8. The only reason we haven't left already is pride and an inability to admit we were wrong.

Another opinion.

>
>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.

I would not question your patriotism. Your opinions are shared by many, I just happen to disagree with them.

History will judge harshly - opinion
History will judge - fact

>
>>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".