As we learned in Viet Nam and we are learning in Iraq, you cannot win a ground war by being polite. Other than the polite part there is no real similarity in the two wars. We lost the war in Viet Nam. We undeniably won in Iraq but we have failed to keep the price of peace acceptable to the public.

If you are not willing to commit the force required to do the job and be as ruthless as you must be just don't do it. Use air power, use diplomacy but do not send our troops unless you are willing to kill every person that vaguely resembles resistance.

I knew when this started (and I felt it was justified) that we would have to pacify the country and essentially end Coalition casualties in twelve month. I incorrectly assumed that we knew what it would take and were willing to do it. Whether it was right or wrong is not nearly as important as the fact that we unforgivably screwed it up.

Why we did it or whether it was justified can be argued for centuries but the fact that we have mucked it up is undeniable. Anyone that would not make different decisions based on what we know now is foolish.

It is way too late to commit more forces to do the job. If it were me I would pull out all but Special Ops troops in remote hard sites and offer no more support but advisors, rapid response against resistance cells revealed by intelligence and close air support to Iraqi security at their request.