As Democratic and REpublican presidential candidates, as well as many congress members debate the futility of the IRaq situation, what is disturbing is the tendency to blame Iraqis.
Hillary et. al. call for benchmarks so that the Iraqis "step up to the plate" for the security of their country. While Republicans, for the most part, clamor about how they'd extend Guantanamo Bay. It's like Rudy and Mitt are having a pissing contest on how tough they can be with rogue nations.
Hmmm, many in the rest of the globe consider the U.S. to be a rogue nation.
Politicos say that Iraq leaders just aren't doing enough to insure security for their people, to quash "sectarian violence" sprouting up in the green zone and elsewhere.
But what about the failure of U.S. leadership? Invading Iraq after a brutal dictatorship expecting things to be puppies and rainbows, roses tossed at the troops.
Some parts of the country have less electricity and job prospects than under Saddam. How about Abu Ghraib's scourge brought on by Western treatment, driven by the highest levels of defense. What of the amount of looting allowed and decision by Paul Bremer to purge Iraq of Baathist elements who have experience to rule?
The Iraqi's didn't bring all of this on themselves, though tensions between Shia and Sunnis doesn't help. They got caught up in what UW alumnus/Washington post correspondent Anthony Shadid calls "The U.S. war in Iraq."
Politicos don't seem to recognize that Iraq and Iran have a history of a bright civilization with preservation of the arts and sciences. Though that was muddied further when English and French colonialists grasped for oil in the early 20th century.
OF course, the ones in charge usually don't have problems finding scapegoats.
For a look into the Iraqi consciousness, see this blog by an Iraqi teenager who's lost most of his family.