bush wants to "own" the war???

Bush has to consider what to do now...commit more troops, ask for un assistance, or seek allied assistance outside the un...

see nytimes article: In Besieged Iraq, Reality Pokes Ideology in the Eye

I'm a bit disturbed by the idea that our president would actually put our troops in graver risk than necessary simply to "save face" or to "own" the war.

we are not talking feathers in caps here, we are talking about the stability of an entire region, and the responsibility that comes with toppling a regime and embarking on nation building.

will anyone care if america "owns" the war? the only thing anyone really cares about is being able to live in peace, whether that is in baghdad or boston.

if we screw up (which is looking pretty likely), do we even want to be holding the "ownership" bag?

I think the real lesson to be learned here is that the united states, as the world's only superpower, has certain responsibilities for ensuring international peace and stability, but we cannot do everything on our own.

much as we would like to think that we "know it all," we are acting like a teenager when it comes to our global responsibilities. we do not know it all, we are not all powerful, and we do, in fact, need help from our friends and family (allies & UN).

we have a pretty good military. we kick butt in wars, and the fact that we have bigger better guns with bigger better soldiers behind them does a lot for keeping things pretty peaceful, and keeping the rogues in check.

we suck at nation building. this is not what the military is trained to do, and that is why it isn't working. our last truly successful nation building was germany and japan, and we did not do that alone.

this is why we have the UN and why the UN is still relevant. the UN is better equipped for nation building, can put together and direct a multinational commission to oversee infrastructure needs and government restructuring.

with the security situation as it is, and iraq becoming an open field for every islamic terrorist, the US needs to keep its troops there, and maybe even commit more, but keep them concentrated on security.

if the US steps aside as the nation-builder, and yields that to the UN, then there will be considerably less hostility toward the US. If we are alone, then everything becomes our fault -- from the lights going out to the suicide bombing of UN headquarters.

if we don't involve the UN in the nation building, history will view this as the single most detrimental strategic failing of the bush administration, and this administration will go down as a black mark history and an example of what not to do in foreign policy.