The US should select a day with minimum suicide bombings and declare PEACE, turn the keys to the city (and $100,000,000) over to the Iraq government that night and LEAVE the next morning.

Alternately, as was done in Vietnam, declare that the local government has things well in hand and start sending the troops home.

Don't look back.

Surely, you jest

"Surely you jest..." Jest no, but, admittedly, that was an ridiculiously large order to fill, and probably impossible. Still, one may dream, and hope. If we DO pull out, we're sending a clear message to the terrorists that bombing and disruption of the civil government works. If we DON'T pull out, it just continues. Historically, I don't know of any government imposed on a nation from the outside that has ever survived. Look at what happened to Maximillian's government in Mexico after the French pulled out. A news magazine recently said, "This is a war we cannot win, a war that we cannot lose, and a war that we cannot leave." I'm baffled. (By the way, think of this as a political science discussion.) Best wishes, Bob in Reno.

If history is any indication, America will simply loose interest in Iraq. Some other more important issue will come up and the US will move on. There will be a lot of finger pointing and navel gazing but in the end it will be like any other war. A waste.

"...How do we end the war in IRAQ???...

Simple. Elect Democrats who have no interest in making big oil richer."

That is probably true! democrats normally dance to the tune of different corporate drummers than republicans do. But, make NO mistake about it; they (democrats) are still

Those are some really good comments, folks! I can't argue with any of them. Yes, it is futile. Yes, we are destined to pull out, one way or another. And no, it isn't worth losing the lives of our people - not without a CLEAR, OBVIOUS PURPOSE, and a concrete, OBTAINABLE goal (ha ha). Here's a really weird suggestion: Since Iraq is hopelessly divided into at least three major power blocks, why not just "go with the flow," i.e., Balkanize the place and make THREE separate countries out of it; one for the Sheites, one for the Sunis, and a third as a national homeland for the Kurds. Then we could leave, and watch them argue across their own national borders. There are probably huge holes in this idea. Meanwhile, please keep those contributions coming, and don't forget to send money to my secret secret Swiss bank account.

Dividing it into three separate countries sounds like a good idea. But they would still be fighting over who owns the oil. Bottom line is Bush and his cronies would not be any closer to getting their hands on it.

You and people like you are part of the problem, and the real reason we havnt won the war in iraq already.
We turned over viet-nam because of you bleeding hearts and i left a lot of good friends over there because of the protesters being fed what war is really like by the media and americans, or some americans dont have the stomach for it.Thank GOD that the media wasnt able to send the crap they send now during ww1 and ww2 or we probably would not be living free now.
I talk to a lot of military people and not one of them want to just walk away, they want to give the iraqis the freedom everyone on this planet desires.
GOD BLESS OUR TROOPS

I agree with your view.
As a retired member of the army, I've watched in
intense intrest the way that strategies and tactics
have been handled to date.
Our theater and regional commanders need complete autonomy and be given complete latitude in handling
terrorists and insurgents. Having to consult with Washington every time a decission needs to be made, slows the process and by the time Washington responds, the situation would surely have changed.
Lets not have a repeat of Viet Nam, let the soldiers handle the war, not the politicians or the media.
By the way, a terrorist cannot be reformed except with the lead pill.