A Most Politically Correct War

Is our mission in Iraq accomplished? Let's see, we went in to prevent Saddam Hussein from developing and using Weapons of Mass Destruction. We did that, by default. We went in to save the Iraqi people from their leader Saddam Hussein. We did that. Then we went in to establish a Democratic government in the Middle East. We did that--the Iraqis voted in a democracy. Now the rationale is, we got to stay some sort of course, win the war against the terrorists, and preserve democracy so it will be a beacon to which all freedom loving Arabs will flock to in years to come. If I didn't know any better I would think we have an administration that is idealistically confused and didn't know why they went into Iraq. They do know that if anyone is against their war they are unpatriotic and trying to help the terrorists win the war. Is it really a war?
A conflict of sorts yes. We are fighting over there to prevent the enemy from coming over here. I'm not so sure the Iraqis are in favor of that strategy however.
Then we have a war that the Pentagon is trying to fight without incurring casualties; almost 2700 troops in 3 plus years? Wonder what Sun Tzu would have to say about that; or about the Iraq war in general?
According to Sun Tzu the Administration violated one of the major tenants of war and that is, "Know your enemy". Obviously we didn't and still don't know. Are we fighting terrorists or insurgents, dead-enders, Bathists? Another violated tenant, "Know yourself". What with all the idealistic claptrap being spouted by the Administration and its supporters, it is obvious the Administration doesn't know its own limitations, or goals. Another tenant: don't engage in long and expensive conflicts. Another tenant: don't take on more than you can chew; in other words don't start a fight where the outcome is in doubt. It would seem that after watching the conflict between the Arabs and Israel that the Administration would have had an idea of what could happen if a Western army took over an Arab country. As far as a Democratic beacon, what about Israel? Wasn't it a shining example of Democracy that the Arabs could aspire to?
So are we fighting a war? Are we winning hears and minds? If the Administration depended on deeds rather than words we might be someplace today. The U.S. had everyone's attention right after 9/11 but that was squandered by this Administration by attacking a scapegoat; which we now are trying to resuscitate. So what should the plan be? What do we want to accomplish?
First of all we can't protect ourselves from every terrorist that wants to do us damage. The good news is terrorists can't take over the country; they can only do relatively minor damage. Israel is a good example of what is possible and what isn't; security wise. If cockpit doors were locked 9/11 wouldn't likely to have happened. Now if our borders were secured and other simple measures were taken we wouln't have much to worry about. What about Iraq?
Nothing can be done about Iraq until the violence is stopped and that can't be done without securing the streets. That means many more troops and measures that will halt the transport of explosives from storage areas to target areas. "Staying the course" will assure our defeat because it is a bunch of half-measures. Deciding on what we want to accomplish, then developing the tactics to achieve the goal is what needs to be done. So far the mishmash of Iraqi and U.S. command and control is a prescription for disaster. Democracy is fine when everyone agrees to play by the rules. Unfortunatley some are not playing by our "rules".