Hot potato

I know I'm not the only one dismayed by the lack of coverage Iraq has been given in the media and the presidential campaign. With rising inflation, unemployment, and a seemingly never ending fall in the housing market, it is no surprise that the economy has become issue #1 in this race. These are real and legitimate domestic problems, and Afghanistan may pose a bigger threat to the overall security of the US, but let's not forget the US government spends $720 million a day in Iraq. The war should be a central concern of our national consciousness and it's not. When news that the US will hand over security in Anbar to Iraqi forces is on page 14 of the NY Times and barely mentioned throughout the blogosphere, it is obvious how far our foray into Iraq has slipped from the political dialogue.

But, whenever politicians do talk about Iraq some sort of unspoken consensus emerges. With a timetable agreed to by pretty much everyone, there is no longer a real discussion of whether this is the right path for Iraq (or what will follow). With developments like this handover slowly occurring, is Iraq really a stable and peaceful democracy?

In a word, no. BUT, if the Iraqi government is reaching oil deals, maintaining security, and on the path to elections have we done our job in Iraq? That's a bit of a loaded question since we never really had a defined goal. Iraq is certainly not stable nor peaceful but is on the road there. More important than transitional takeovers and timetables is the manner our exit is executed and the legacy we leave behind.

Just keep in mind that Anbar is where the Sunni Awakening started...