Support your troops. Unless, of course, you ARE the troops. Then get the hell out of there as fast as you can. What's it say about the state of the conflict that even the military is saying, "Yeah, we're gonna go back to the other war and see how that one's going. But stick around. I'm sure you guys will be fine without us."

The idea that each branch of the military should handle their own "war" is absolutely absurd. It's the kind of thinking that only the children in the White House could possibly come up with. What good conclusion could possibly come from that line of logic? Is the Navy going to get in a strictly sea-borne tussle with North Korea? Maybe the Air Force can go toe-to-toe with the Ukraine, just to keep in practice.

Of course, Afghanistan is on the other side of Iran. Maybe they're planning a two pronged conflict?

. . . that the Iraq War is a pointless distraction from America's real post-9/11 mission: the capture and prosecution of Top Al-Queda coordinators and operatives responsible for the planning and execution of the attacks.

George W. Bush and the Neo-Con lunatics in the Cheney/Wolfowitz/Rumsfeld axis of insanity diverted valuable resources from a legitmate operation to mount an ill-advised oil crusade with creepy Oedipal overtones for our commander in chief.

The Marine Commanders simply want to finish the war that was an actual response to the 9/11 attacks.

Keep in mind that the insurgency in Iraq and radical jihadists the world over have been emboldened and inspired by the Administration's (not the military's) failure to capture those responsible for the most devastating attack ever on US soil. The capture and public humiliation of Osama Bin Laden is essential to destroying the confidence of our enemies in the so-called war on terror.

I say let the Marines go. Then again, I think 80% of our resources in Iraq should be redeployed towards our more valuable mission. Capture the real Al Quada and the imitators in Iraq will soon be shut down.

Then, in stage two, Operation Phantom Blunder, we'll give all the bullets to the Marines, and all the guns to the Army, thus diversifyig our forces. The Army guys can throw the bullets at insurgents, while the Marines beat the Taliban over the head with their guns.

Pulling the Marines out of Iraq would leave that war in the hands of the Army AND Blackwater, but mostly Blackwater. And we know how well they've been doing at winning hearts and minds. One of the reasons the Marines may want out is because they've seen Blackwater's cynical ineptitude undercut their efforts so many times. The Marines were making real progress at establishing a rapport with the people in Fallujah before those clowns blundered into town and blew it.

The Marines are designed to be a more agile force whereas the Army is more about high numbers and heavy equipment. Rumsfeld's big mistake (well, one of many) was thinking Iraq could be managed with a small, light force.

This also reinforces the realities of the "War on Terror"--Iraq requires a heavy troop presence to maintain stability among the various sectarian and ethnic factions. But the real threat is in Afghanistan, which requires more stealth and ingenuity to fight Al Qaeda.

Are they just now realizing this?

I just have a sneaking feeling we'll see alot more attention lavished on Afghanistan and the hunt for Osama with the presidential primaries coming up.

The curtain goin up and Osama in chains like King Kong at the Republican convention. I can see it.

At this point that's the only hope they have.

It is absurd on its face to entertain the idea of the Marine Corps commandant publicly requesting the pull-out of Marines from Iraq on his own.

He does not have the authority to do that.

This idea had to have been vetted and approved in advance by the Sec. Def. Gates, on orders from the White House, and then given the go-ahead by the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

It's amazing to me that our dutiful stenographers in the American press just pass along these absurdities without question.

this has all the trappings of a "declare victory and get out" moment.

Can't you see what's happening here? This is not what it appears to be.

This is a troop withdrawal plan in the making, without having to admit that it's a troop withdrawal.

No doubt the Republicans facing re-election were ready to storm the White House with torches and pitchforks if our little swagger monkey didn't get off his ass and start saving the Republican Party from a complete rout in 2008.

isn't it strange that they're idea is to go to Afghanistan and further away from Iran where more than likely they would be the front line of an invasion.

If it's true then perhaps this is a way of showing Bush and Co. that they won't be patsies for their new Neo-Con schemes of aggression.

Two large armies flanking Iran. Once the bombing campagin begins Cheney will open two fronts on opposite borders of Iran. A perfect plan until the Iranian missles start flying towards Isreal and Bagdad, and perhaps one or two aimed at Saudi oil fields, followed by the same incoming from Syria and Lebanon. WW 111. Nice idea Cheney. Boy I wish I had an undisclosed location to hide in when the terrorists begin in earnst to retaliate...

From the NYT:

"The suggestion (by the commandant) was raised in a session last week convened by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates for the Joint Chiefs of Staff and regional war-fighting commanders.

On its face, it makes sense. The Corps has always been in conflict with the other branches of the armed services, especially the Army. In the Pacific War against the Japanese, the Army would come in after the Marines had taken an island, suffered the casualties, etc. That is, done all the dirty work and the Army would follow up and get all the "glory". I can't imagine what the Marines think of what's going on in Iraq but I'd wager that a large part of it is based on the historical enmity (or rivalry to put a kinder spin on it) they have against the Army. At this point I have to wonder how much it really matters.