[tw]

An ongoing analysis of Iraq has three options: "Go big, go long, or go home". The analysis of these options (including one by three highly regarded Colonels) is leaking all over the news services. "Go long" is a new expression for 'stay the course' which means troop number changes (up or down) by some tens of thousands. “Go long” is an obvious and complete loser’s strategy.

"Go Big" means hundreds of thousands of troops deployed now. Next year means hundreds of thousands will not accomplish anything. Iraq is that close to a cliff.

Hope for a successful application of 500,000 troops for one year is currently about 50-50 and diminishing each month. Henry Kissinger has already declared the Iraqi war is not winnable – because Iraq has been that bad for that long. That should have been your obvious concern over a year ago - long after Scowcroft defined what is now an ongoing Iraqi civil war.

Meanwhile no one is talking about that other war that still can be saved but is also being lost - Afghanistan. British leaders only provided about 10% of the troops that British military commanders in Afghanistan desperately requested.

Leaders are supposed to know when to cut their losses long before everything is lost. American leaders will be telling George Jr what to decide within a month.

"Cut and Run" will not be acceptable to those in power because it admits something glaring obvious - "Mission Accomplished" was lost when the looting began. So these same analysts will be looking for "Blame and Run" - which is really "cut and run" with a propaganda spin. Unfortunately for American soldiers, that may be more of "Go long".