Congressional Republicans are edging closer and closer to a "declare victory and leave" strategy in Iraq, as the newly pronounced (and apparently pretty popular) resistence to US occupation is not simply dissolving and wafting away. Republican Senator Chuck Hagel on Wolf Blitzer's CNN Sock Puppet Parade:

BLITZER: Senator Hagel, a lot of people in Fallujah -- this is a city of about 200,000, maybe 300,000 people -- see this as a victory for the so-called insurgents, this Marine pullback, sending this kind of message. What does it say to you?

HAGEL: Well, first, we don't have many good options. In fact, we have no good options. The fact is that we need to stay focused on getting the Iraqis into a position where they can govern themselves, where they can securitize themselves, where they can lead.

That's the new drift, and it signals a potential break between the President and his Party. Congressional Republicans (as well as Governors and local pols) are feeling the heat that the war is already generating, and they're imagining what could come in this election if something catastrophic were to happen. They believe the Hype about Madrid; that Al-Qaeda swung that election rather than the (not-so) Popular Party's transparent attempt to spin the attacks there into a boost in the polls. They fear that the same might happen here, that the war might continue festering (or even get worse), or that a domestic terror incident could cause a massive swing.

So Republican office-holders as a mass are spooked, and they're betting on the war being a looser unless we can get out soon. The President is on his own mission from God though. If he's not taking war advice from his own damn father, I highly doubt he'll take it from Ed Gelespie. Thus the potential wedge.

And the Dems seem just about ready to split their hand open trying to bang on it. The talk from the DC crowd is all about "we went there to give them Democracy; the lack of planning has left us this mess." This is a disaster waiting to happen. The implicit message is "so put someone better in charge and lets make it work." We're all pro-war now. It's a bit like '64, faced with (LBJ) someone who merely wanted to "escalate" Vietnam vs. someone who was a firebrand idealogue who talked (Goldwater) openly of Nuking China... well, people went with the more sane-seeming dude.

As both parties are about to learn, the Zeitgeist is about resisting shitty governing practices, not about being afraid of terrorists or chasing someone else's dream of empire. Spain wants out of Iraq, and rightly so, but they're willing to go to bat in Afghanistan, where the terrorists are -- ahem -- still operating from. They've got the right idea.

That being said, we can't literally drop everything and go. We need a 1-year plan to transfer all possible reconstruction contracts to native Iraqi workers; to have the UN oversee a series of elections and conventions to create a new system of state. As for the troops, we should be gradually moving US troops out of offensive or high-visibility positions. We should use US force as a vigorous oversight on well-trained, well-paid Iraqi police, ensuring that patterns of violence and oppression do not re-emerge. We should give aid, we should offer support and expertise, but we should get out of the decision-making process ASAP.

The truth is, we've blown our credibility with the people of Iraq (other than the Kurds). They don't want us, and they don't believe in our ability to be a truly positive factor. They're glad Saddam's gone, but they'd rather we let them run their country now, thanks very much. We should respect that, and find the most generous and well-intentioned way to do that. We don't need Iraq to be our provence in order to move forward as a nation. It's ok. We can let it go, and we should.

Who will speak this truth and be taken seriously? Sane Republicans and people like Howard Dean.