[Perhaps I should consider changing my onlne persona to "Rogue Elephant"--something fitting my size, party affiliation, and thinking--or "Lose Cannon"--at least I think I am aiming at particular targets, but I know my voice is not that strong. So, with the usual disclaimer of "that's his opinon, we welcome yours", read on.]

Our present involvement in Iraq is an ongoing fiasco (read failure) worse than Vietnam. The U.S. had no business invading Iraq recently (okay, so it was 5 years ago), and even less of a plan, purpose, or pretext than in Vietnam.

Even the triumphal entry into Baghdad following the 'shock and awe', which was accomplished faster than anyone expected, and certainly faster than Tariq Aziz would have Iraqis believe, was a failure, in my opinion, because it constitued fraud--promising something one cannot deliver. The former President Bush also committed fraud in that certain Iraqis were led to believe that the U.S. would back them up if they were to try removing Saddam Hussein.

I have been asked, "Do you call closing down torture chambers and rape rooms a failure? Are the Iraqis not better off without Saddam Hussein?" and the like. My question back is "Do the ends justify the means?"

"Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves darnation."

Yes, I do know what the following verses say about not being a terror to good works, but to evil. While the passage is aimed at individuals, it still asserts God's sovereignty over human government. "Shall a man rob God?" I think George Bush and company may have done just that in Iraq. How? "Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord."

Remember the commercial in which a startup company puts it e-commerce site online and then celebrates when the first few orders come in? The staff stare, drop-jawed, at the monitor when the rate of orders rapidly increases to what is obviously beyond their capacity. The same thing has happened in Iraq, only no one in this administration had the intelligence to realize it or the guts to acknowledge it. Those first days of celebration mock the reality of the years that followed. (Typical American arrogance and overweening confidence: "darn the torpedoes! Full speed ahead!")

So, what do we do now? I am reminded of the position, unpopular with mission boards and churches, that a local pastor, trained in a fundamentalist university in America, has taken concerning what to do when men who have multiple wives become born again believers. He tells them they must stay married to all their wives and support them and their children. A fitting solution, I think. Thus, the U.S. shoud not simply hit and run. I believe we have done as awful a job of fulfilling our obligation to Iraq as we have done in creating the present state of affairs.

America needs to make an end of its involvement in a timely and honorable manner. One solution might be to divide the country into three semi-autonomous provinces with a fourth entity to take care of the oil resources, security, and other national interests. Appoint, if necessary, leaders at the highest levels in order to get some governmental structure set up up for each province. Then, set a day and time for the provincial boundaries to take effect, and provide transport for those wanting and needing assistance in getting to the province of their choice.

Is this a disruptive plan, not unlike what happened when Britain pulled out of India, splitting that country apart? Granted. But now that I've shown you mine, you show me yours.