From everything I've heard/read in the last few months I'd say that U.S. troops are to be in Iraq at least for the balance of my lifetime.

There was a time that we all were led to believe that ***NO*** U.S. military personnel would remain in Iraq after 'democracy was established' (my phraseology) or the official Iraqi government asked the U.S. to remove all of its troops.

It now appears, at best, that troops will stay until asked to leave, and we can be quite sure that the official Iraqi government has been told to never ask for that.

Last I heard there were 14 new U.S. military bases being built (some should be finished by now I assume) on Iraqi soil. I suppose these could be being built for the benefit of the Iraqi forces < s >.

The U.S. has been pushing for months and months to get the Iraqis to make the 'oil law' official. Doesn't it seem sensible to assume that the Iraqis themselves have some real problems with the whole concept given their reticence to move on the issue??? Has the U.S. demonstrated **any** flexibility regarding the proposed law? (a non-rhetorical question because I honestly don't know).

It has been my position that the U.S. cannot and should not leave Iraq until they have 'repaired' **all** of the damage caused by the war. Things like oil production, electricity availability, clean water availability, sewage, etc are all operating at at least pre-war levels of production. But, frankly, that looks to be an impossible dream at this point.
While I think those things - plus the obvious, SECURITY for all Iraqis - should be in place before the U.S. leaves, my thinking is changing. Not sure to what yet.


>It would be interesting to see a more recent poll:
>
>http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/brmiddleeastnafricara/250.php?nid=&id=&pnt=250&lb=brme
>
>Granted, a small number in comparison to the general population were polled and in Iraq opinion can vary greatly between geographic and/or political regions.