Had dinner with some good folks tonight, and they thought without question we should just have our troops pack up and leave Iraq and Afghanistan today.

If not today, then sneak 'em out 1/6 at a time for six months, "'cause no one would notice that." I didn't want to point out that if we brought home 1/6 of the troops at a time, we'd only end up bringing a small fraction of the troops home, because I knew they meant 1/6 of today's deployment.

I suggested that suddenly withdrawing would leave the citizens with certain doom. I tried to remind (which seemed to apparently mean "inform") them that the insurgents in those countries aren't really from those countries. Sure, some of the fighters, maybe even some of the leaders, and many of the suicide bombers are, but the most evil and connected of these terrorists are from other countries, and their objectives aren't necessarily aligned with the needs of the nation that exists today, but rather that their objectives are toward forming a new nation, based on one interpretation of their religion.

If not suddenly withdraw, they countered, perhaps let one of the neighboring countries provide security instead. I offered "perhaps we could let the Iranians secure Iraq, or the Pakistanis could watch over Afghanistan." They clarified by suggesting "neighbors" meant Germany or France. I couldn't believe it.

I'm sure I've been snowed by the media as much as the next person. I'm sure my opinions are interpretations are skewed by the contributions of my childhood. I try to keep an open mind and realize that the world isn't filled with people that think the same way I do, want the same things I want, or believe in the same "sacred things" that I believe in.

I have bought into the idea that the countries and governments we overthrew are in a state of chaos, and that they don't have an established, trained, and prepared force to help secure their countries. In Iraq, police stations are frequently struck by suicide bombers, drive by shootings, and ambushes. Our military has reported that the Iraqi military we're training is ill prepared to handle the current situation, much less defend their borders.

Let's pretend that our forces are causing the uprising; I've misunderstood and they're truly trying to eject what they believe is an invading conqueror. OK, we say we're sorry, provide some restitution (heck, leave the tanks behind), and we leave all in one day.

Does the insurgency stop? Let's pretend it does. They've ejected the invaders, and they're very happy about that, so they stop fighting each other in such a fashion.

Now what?

They don't agree on religion. They don't agree to disagree on religion. They've been under dictatorship for most of the citizens' lives. Arguably we forced democracy down their throats, so we can't even pretend that they've agreed to the concept. They can't even say they truly agree with what they've put together under our guidance.

But let's pretend they give in, and decide amongst themselves to either peacefully coexist, as we're lucky to do in America, or that they come up with an agreeable division of the country so the different factions can live in peace without intermingling; states or provinces based on whatever they find it necessary to divide upon.

Let's also pretend that they come up with a peaceful interaction to allow trade so the people can all get what they need. They pick democratic govenerships, or regional lords in a new feudal system, or some kind of socialist or communist government forms, or even a dictatorship. Whatever, they've got government they more-or-less agree to and start living with.

All peachy-keen.

But while this is happening, since the troops aren't "internationally prepared," or if we pretend they are, but now they're divided into their geo-religious-regions, they're loyal locally, not nationally. Do we really believe Syria, Lebanon, Turkey, Iraq, and even Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, or India will leave them alone to grow and develop their own form of prosperity?

I don't think so.

I'm leaning very far toward total elimination of confirmed threat. If we see a training camp, and we confirm they're performing terrorist operations or providing terrorists with stuff, take it out. Test out that new Iraqi army, show 'em more "shock and awe." When we get good solid information on safe houses and terrorists strongholds, eliminate them. Storm them with a dozen choppers and 100 Marines. Show them what terror is like, on the other end.

But leave? I don't think we can leave until US troops are able to wave good-bye to their local replacements as they head out on missions of their national security, and greet them with high-fives as they return from successful missions with no more than reasonable casualties than the mission should have.

Do we want to train these guys as well as we've trained our own Marines and soldiers? Maybe not, but pretty close. I'm done with providing our allies with the same goods we have, only to find them as adversaries later. We helped Afghanistan expel the Soviets, only to find they turned into a haven for training people to attack us. We give help in the Iran-Iraq wars, only to find that neither side appreciates us. We provide the Saudis with all kinds of help, only to find they don't want to help back.

I say we stop giving the help away, provide some stability instead through hands-on effort, securing the innocent citizenry by helping their national forces become regionally competitive, and then let them largely be.

They don't seem to get it; we, as individuals in the nation, don't have a collective grudge against them because of where or how they praise or worship whatever supernatural force that provides them comfort and well-being. We're probably holding a grudge because we had to step in to stop the bully only to find we're suddenly the center of conflict.