"If this is not civil war, then God knows what civil war is"

Tomorrow is the third anniversary of the beginning of the aggression against Iraq that has created chaos and cost tens of thousands of lives. For much of that time, many people and organizations have called for the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, a group which has become increasingly numerous and politically diverse. They have been attacked by the far right who accuse them of wanting to 'cut and run' (ie: spend more lives and money in an impossible cause). Defenders of the aggression have insisted that we must (hold hand over heart) 'stay the course.'

'Stay the course,' much like 'Support our troops,' is a neat rhetorical trick to bludgeon opponents into silence. But much like 'Support our troops,' 'Stay the course' is empty propaganda, not a strategy.

Appeals to 'Stay the course' beg the question 'What course?'

No one has the slightest idea.

There are many people who opposed the aggression in the beginning but reluctantly believe that we must stay in Iraq to finish the job. It would be irresponsible for us to so badly break Iraq and then leave Iraqis alone to clean up the mess. Such people argued that if US troops left Iraq 'hastily' (whatever that means), then Iraq would be plunged into civil war. For a long time, I was one of those people.

No more.

Iraq IS in civil war already, DESPITE the presence of over 150,000 mostly American troops. Some argue, convincingly, that far from restraining things, the presence of foreign troops is INFLAMING the violence. And this is precisely what I and many other pre-war critics of the invasion feared.

Some felt that we would invade Iraq and everyone would welcome us with flowers and parades. This betrayed a criminal ignorance of both history and human nature. When the UN issues a report criticizing the deplorable human rights situation at Guantanamo Bay, the spines of many Americans stiffen. 'Who are those foreigners to tell us what to do?' If Americans can't tolerate foreign criticism in the press, how naive were those Americans who thought Iraqis would welcome foreigners conquering and running their country?

Iraq has a huge presence of well-armed and well-trained foreign troops. Yet, the situation continues to deteriorate.

Even former Iraqi prime minister Iyad Allawi insisted that Iraq was in civil war.
"It is unfortunate that we are in civil war. We are losing each day as an average 50 to 60 people throughout the country, if not more," he told the BBC. "If this is not civil war, then God knows what civil war is."

He also warned that Iraq is moving toward the "point of no return",

Granted, Allawi is not one of those evil hippie peaceniks that many on the far right like to demonize. Nor is he a Democrat (cue menacing music) 'playing partisan politics'... as only Democrats do, we are told. But he was installed to his position by the American-led coalition.

The coalition has been in Iraq for three years and has spent hundres of billions of dollars. Yet the situation is getting worse, not better. If two of the most powerful armies in the world backed by virtually unlimited and unrestricted funds can not bring peace and stability to Iraq, then maybe this demonstrates how impossible the mission was in the first place.

I always contended that the Iraq aggression was a horrible idea, badly executed. No one likes to admit failure but this was a mission that NO military was capable of pulling off. No military, at least not in the 21st century, is capable of invalidating human nature. Simply put, people don't like to be governed by foreigners.

I've never called for a withdrawal of US troops.

Until now.

Iraq has a constitution. It has an elected government. It has the basis upon which the country can move forward, if its citizens and politicians want to. If they don't want to, there is absolutely nothing any outside power can do about it.

While I don't believe we should pull out all soldiers tomorrow, US troops should start the process of withdrawal now.

Most troops should leave Iraq within a few months.

Some should remain to help train the Iraqi police force and army, that were dismantled by the US viceroy. However, they should leave too as soon as the police and army are self-sustaining.

As long as Iraqis think they are dependent on the US and UK for their security (such as it is), they will never become a self-sufficient nation. While some angrily denounce the idea of a timetable, the fact is that it is necessary to pressure the Iraqis to speed things up. Conservatives argue that poor people need a time limit on the amount of welfare they can receive because they need that pressure to make themselves self-sufficient; why doesn't that reasoning apply here? A gradual withdrawal of foreign troops will put pressure on the Iraqi police and army to step up to the plate.

Iraq is in civil war. Not only did the US-led aggression cause it but our presence is prolonging it, not shortening it. The process of withdrawal must begin immediately.

Update: in case there was a microgram of doubt about whether this course of action would be followed, the president has removed it. On Wednesday, Bush promised troops would stay in Iraq at least until 2009.