Well folks, to celebrate what looks to be my 10,000th hit to my blog today, I will take on an issue that I have been conspicuously quiet on over the past months. Don't hate me for it, but I will be blunt.

Now, with that said...

Unlike the liberal democrats out there, I have no blame to place on the administration nor do I have any crazy conspiracy theories about oil money, war profiteering or the Cheney - Haliburton connection. I leave that sort of insanity to Cindy Sheehan and her rabid followers. Instead I will throw all of that back in the faces of those moonbats and actually say that I believe that the Bush administration did the right thing in taking on Iraq. But the right thing and good ideas are not always a hand-in-hand issues. Let me explain:

The Bush administration gave the Iraqi people the greatest gift any nation can receive. Toss democracy out of the equation if you want, but the underlying gift that was given was the chance at a new way of life. The Iraqi people were relieved of an oppressive and violent government and essentially given a clean slate with which to re-form their country into something else. Not only were they given a chance, they were also given use of a military force with which to help keep the peace and protect them from outside forces while they reformulated their new infant of a country into something that can be self-sustaining.

Can any country ask for a better gift? Just ask the countries that were liberated during World War 2. Or how about more recent times... Ask Kuwait what sort of gift liberation is. People on Earth deserve as many chances as it takes to have a home that is as free as possible and that allows its people the best chance at happiness and prosperity. Of course, it doesn't always work out like that, and not every country gets those opportunities... Which is why the gift that was given to the Iraqi people is particularly grand. That is what makes the military action against Iraq the right thing to do. It gave them a second chance at life.

However, that doesn't mean that it was a good idea, and knowing what we know now, we can probably say that it was a bad idea. This does not mean that the Bush administration is to blame, however. Quite the contrary, nobody is to blame but the Iraqi people. Our administration and military can only do so much, and our only failure here was simply our inability to anticipate the immaturity of the people in the region. What ended up happening over there was like taking away the oppressive babysitter and leaving the ill-mannered toddlers in charge. This wasn't like returning France to the the French during WW2.

See, the reality of the situation is the simple fact that the Iraqi people threw our gift back in our faces. Ok, to be fair, I'm sure it's not everybody over there, but it is certainly a large enough part of the population to keep them from moving forward. Either way, the problem lies with the Iraqi people - whether that's indicative of the people or the religion is a matter of speculation... Or is it? With the intricate ties between the culture and the religion, maybe you don't need to really separate one from the other. Maybe the problem lies as much with Islam as it does with the people.

I hate to be so blunt, but the simple truth lies with the fact that the only "leaders" who are emerging from Iraq are assholes. When presented with a clean slate and an opportunity to start a new nation from scratch, you would expect to see some sort of quality leadership step forward. Where are the George Washingtons, Thomas Jeffersons or Ben Franklins of Iraq? Where are the people who will stand up and reign in control of this fledgling infant of a nation and unite the people under the Iraqi flag under the promise of a bold new future? They're just not there. Instead they have allowed themselves to be consumed with petty infighting between religious factions and the only leaders who are emerging are terrorists and jihadists who have little interest in building a new and modern Iraqi nation and are instead interested in waging war with the evil Western infidels and spreading Islamic extremism across the country.

So is it fear that is keeping the Iraqi people from moving forward, or is it just a lack of motivation? I mean, by the numbers there are far more Iraqis who are not jihad extremists, yet they're the ones who are steering the direction of the country. Is it fear that keeps quality leaders from emerging in Iraq, or is the problem deeper than that?

It is my suspicion that it is that very thing that the Bush administration and the US military didn't anticipate before moving on Iraq. I believe that the problem is in fact that deep, and that the problem goes far beyond fear. I think that the people in Iraq are capable of building a new country, but they are not willing to set aside their own differences and step up to the plate. Even if they did find a George Washington to step up and take the reigns, he would only have the support of his own faction. The rest of the factions would not rally beneath a leader that isn't their own. Can you imagine where we would be as a nation if Lutherans and Baptists refused to acknowledge a Methodist leader? It would be chaos - and all stemming from stubbornness and refusing to be tolerant. Two things that are plaguing the Iraqi people right now.

As an issue, this is not limited to Iraq. This is a plague that falls over a good majority of the Middle Eastern nations. It seems that if they're not busy hating the Jews and Israel, they're busy hating and killing each other. Just look at the recent violence in Lebanon, Pakistan and Palestine. It's wide-spread and getting worse, which interestingly seems to be following the spread of Islamic extremism.

Perhaps we were too naive in assuming that things would be different in Iraq if they were given the opportunity to create a new nation. As much as I hate today it, Saddam Hussein may have had a much better understanding of his people than the rest of us did; and while I don't condone the things he did, I think I can understand why he employed the methods he used to keep Iraq under control. Maybe these people do in fact need a strict babysitter to keep them in line. Maybe they do need somebody to stand up and tell them that "this is the way things are, so shut up and go about your lives." Whereas we have our idea as to what a George Washington character should be, maybe we're wrong in thinking that sort of person could ever hope to lead the Iraqi people.

However, contrary to the democrat's opinion on things, we have to acknowledge that throwing our hands in the air and walking away will not solve Iraq's problems. We gave them a clean slate with which to work with, and we need to continue to protect this fledgling nation not only from itself, but from the other "interested" parties who are chomping at the bit to incorporate Iraq into their own regimes. The people of Iraq deserve the chance to overcome their own problems and move their nation forward. Sadly, I think that it might take a strong man (hopefully less than a total tyrant however) to come in and secure control over the people, but if that's what it takes I don't think we should stand in his way. If that is to be Iraq's second chance, then so be it. I would like to hope that Iraq's second chance would be having a George Washington stand up and lead the nation to prosperity and peace, but the reality of the situation is somewhat more grim than that.