Dave,
What do you mean by war in Iraq?

The war only lasted a few weeks and Saddams regime was toppled. Remember the dancing in the streets?

The Iraqi people have been too stupid to take the opportunity available to them since that time.

The Sunnis, fearing being wiped out by the Shias, started to blow a few trhings up, to keep the Yanks there, and went too far by blowing up a Shia mosque. So the Shias started blowing things up as well.

The coalition troops there are not fighting a war. The Iraqi people are at war with each other, to establish their pecking order. Probably by the last one standing. If the Iraqis are too stupid to take advantage of the opportunity given them, we should leave them to it. Another dictator may take charge as obviously they do not have the intelligence to govern themselves.

i believe cheney, rumsfeld, perle, and bush had, and still have, a clear purpose in initiating the iraq war. it appears they have not succeeded in accomplishing their purpose, but still too soon to know.

it is clear that their stated purpose was a lie, and the lie might have been a cover for some kind of megalomaniac dream of map re-drawing.

they have made america much less safe. many more people despise americans now, and in this sea of contempt will swim many more people whose contempt has been transformed to raging hatred.

i have no sympathy for any american. it's true that many despise the bush regime, but chiefly for it's lack of success. there will be no push for submission to the international criminal court. and bush is no freak: kennedy, johnson, nixon, and reagan all presided over genocide in southeast asia or central america.

who is winning the iraq war? the carlyle group, for one. the bush family profits from it, so perhaps that is all the success they are looking for.

Banjo,

Your comments sadly display the same ignorance of Iraq that the pro-war regime in the US had/have before invading it. Iraq is not historically a single country and it was prefectly predictable that the disparate groups would fight when there was no longer a dictator to hold the country together.

Same happened to Yugoslavia after the death of Tito.

These consequences are so predictable, it is unbelievable that anyone is surprised. Like putting a match to a pile of firewood and being surprised when it catches alight. Which makes anyone (the US, UK, Australia) setting off such a conflict at least partially culpable.

Although it is not unlikely that predictable Haliburton, Carlyle Group etc profiteering was enough justification for the pro-war hawkes.

carsten,
Ignorant, be dammed! My summation of the events in Iraq since the invasion is pretty accurate. The whole populace rejoiced at the toppling of Saddams statue. But the Sonnis, who were top dogs, needed the yanks for protection as the Shia had about 30 years of vengence to catch up on. The lefties here were saying that the Sunnis wanted the occupiers to leave, but they were wrong, the Sunnis needed the yanks to stay.

I never did say whether I supported the idea of the invasion or not and that is irelavant. The object was to get rid of Saddam and that was acheived easily.

The only war there now is a civil war and I do not think we should loose any sleep over the iraqis stupidity.

Look on the bright side, the Sunnis and the Shia are doing more than most to reduce the worlds over population.

It should not be taken for granted saying America has lost the war comes from those who are anti American only.
As I have said here before I was in favor of the war at its start.
And as I have said I was very wrong.
America has been badly lead in this war, and lost the real battle, for hearts and minds within the first 6 months.
Britain and Australian troops have not yet lost respect of all sides.
Can anyone forget those pictures of torture?
They are a symptom of an America that Bush has created, and the world will never forget them.
The war against terrorism will continue to be fought and the world needs America to return to the country it once was.
Some leadership, such as Bush and Blair with Howard following along holding tightly to the shirt bottom is as much the wests enemy as terrorism.
Draft Al Gore.
America needs a leader who can count.
Count the body's and the costs count the benefits and the losses

Banjo,

Yes, you are generally correct in your summation. Getting rid of Saddam was an easy, if pointless, task. Saddam was a toothless tiger. But there is question of what comes after that is preditably the real problem. The US did not depose Saddam so that anarchy could reign in Iraq. So that the oil reserves could not be fully utilised. So that Iran's position in the region is strengthened. That the anarchy in Iraq could be used as a recruitment drive for further terrorism (from within or without Iraq). Almost everyone in Iraq is materially worse off today than they were under Saddam (possible exceptions being some Kurds in the north).

So - what was the point?