Here’s the question: does anybody really believe that anywhere between 20,000 and 100,000 extra troops in Iraq will really make a difference, long-term? Short-term, maybe, we could see some control return to the streets, but the way things are in Iraq, the control only lasts as long as our troops stay in place, and even then, at a cost in lives (money being a far second in concern).

Somehow, some people–possibly Bush included–believe that once some temporary control can be introduced, that it will become permanent, or at least will have enough of an effect to make a lasting difference. As if there is a threshold that can be so easily passed with a show of minor force that will tilt the country into peace, or at least a close enough stability so that we can “win” the conflict. Either that, or Bush thinks that he can parlay this into some sort of political advantage.

Neither scenario is understandable to me. How will any more troops make a difference now? Even in the unlikely scenario that more troops could make a temporary difference, that our troops could effect an immediate quiet on the streets of Baghdad and the rest of Iraq, how will that make the people involved in sectarian strife settle down and forget what has happened, or stop thinking about what will happen? Forget about the insurgency; the Sunnis, Shi’ites and Kurds will always be at odds over control of land, oil, and control. Each will remember for a very long time the violence carried out against their own over the past few years, and will act on it, if not now, then later. That alone is enough to shoot any stability to hell.

But we cannot forget about the insurgency either, even if we do not consider how it blurs into the sectarian violence and strife. Will even 100,000 troops get rid of them? Hell, no. Even if pushed back, they will still fight and otherwise bide their time, and like all insurgencies, they know that time is on their side and have known since the very beginning (this is not a matter of being buoyed by knowing America will leave if we admit Bush is wrong–they have always known that we will leave, it is the way such things work).

Then there are the surrounding nations–Iran, the Saudis, Syria, probably others as well–who both politically and religiously have a dog in the race, and who will effect influence on what happens.

Very simply put, there is potentially a great deal of power and influence to be dealt from a position of power in Iraq, and whatever government we support will, in the long term, not be able to hold together. It doesn’t matter how many troops we put on the ground now, the key is in the inherent stability of what has been built natively, what will remain after we have left. It is not stable, and it is not capable of standing on its own. This is not a matter of clap-your-hands-style believe-and-it-will-happen optimism winning the day. It is a simple, stark reality that the government in Iraq that Bush has built will collapse, and then it becomes a free-for-all between the many different groups and alliances, none of whom will shy away from massive violence to claw their way to the top spot. And there is no easy winner, no foreseeably viable power that can hold the country together. That’s why it doesn’t matter in the long run how long we stay. It is a matter of Iraq collapsing now or later, the only difference being how many of our own troops we lose.

From the beginning of the Iraq War, they may have been viable pathways to stability. A true international coalition with U.N. participation and oversight; an overwhelming number of troops; a clear interest in the people and their rights and stability rather than profit-taking and American self-interest; participation by many powers in the region with transparent control; a clear and smart exit strategy leaving a strong, stable and controlling force in power–and, of course, less of the colossal incompetence that has marked this administration’s management of Iraq. Fast, quick and decisive. Instead, we got this slow-motion tragedy of terror and ineptitude, and had to watch every last possible avenue which could have led to success blown to pieces as this administration pissed this war away.

What should be clear to anyone right now is that there is no realistic chance of success left, no matter how you define “success.” Who knows, maybe Bush and McCain truly believe that a Hail Mary play has a chance of working. But all it will actually do is deplete our military even more, kill our people and Iraqis even more, and eventually end in failure. Not a failure of the troops, who have done everything asked of them, but a failure of policy, a failure of the people doing the asking and commanding.

But the weakening of our military is not a consequence to be taken lightly. Remember back in 2000 when the conservatives complained that Clinton had hobbled the military? Well, Clinton’s military looks like a monumental powerhouse now next to the shambles Bush has made of it–and no one on the right seems to mind this at all, apparently in the deluded belief that Iraq was somehow necessary or worthwhile. The damage done will take a generation to repair, and that will lead to a weakening of our nation in the world at large, stopping us from acting in places where we should have acted–like, for instance, Afghanistan. In case you had lost track, the Taliban–the bad guys we thought we had won against–never went away, and are still fighting us in a place we should have cleaned out by now, but have not because we went into Iraq. In fact, our “allies” in Pakistan may even be harboring and helping them. And there are signs that it is only going to get worse.

Conservatives in denial, who believe that Bush has somehow strengthened our country, love to bring up Libya, as if their disarming had anything to do with Bush, as a sign of how powerful we are because Bush has all the evil tyrants in the world wetting themselves. What a crock. Bush has weakened the U.S. more than any U.S. leader in memory, and everyone in the world knows about it except wingnuts here at home.

The only best course of action for us right now is to concentrate as best we can in Afghanistan; to fight terror the way it should be fought, with tightly focused and solid investigative work and surgical strikes combined with global collaborative strategies; and otherwise to come home and heal ourselves–starting as soon as possible by voting out the lunatics who got us into this mess and taking on a new world view and strategy.

If we “stay the course,” however, we are literally asking for self-ruin.