President Bush is not thinking clearly or, at the very least, he is formulating ideas four years later than he should be. His latest attempt at being a “wartime president” — his so-called “surge” (a nicer way of saying “escalation”) — was seriously needed years ago, but denied by the president due to his unforgiving stubbornness.

At this point, a surge of 20,000 troops will do little good regarding what is needed in Iraq. What exactly is needed in Iraq? Responsibility of the Iraqi citizens themselves.

Right now, the citizens of Iraq have little incentive to the effect of “standing up” (as the president himself puts it) and defending their own country if a powerful army like ours is there to do it for them.

Think about it: you’re a defenseless nation whose army has recently been disbanded. The world’s sole superpower is currently trying to maintain your defense. Would you want them to leave? I think not.

A phased withdrawal, on the other hand, shows we are serious about holding the Iraqis responsible for their own defense. We will be there to help them, but we cannot be there forever.

There are some who will argue that withdrawing from Iraq will leave the region vulnerable, and that Iraq will become a safe haven for terrorists. To those critics who make this point, I ask you: are we not able, with the strength our soldiers possess, to return to the region if such a scenario played out? If we withdraw some troops from the region, and conditions worsen, can we not resend troops to the region?

“Staying the course” has not encouraged the Iraqis to take the reigns of their own defenses. Adding more troops will further discourage the Iraqis from taking charge, just as hiring a maid discourages a spoiled child from cleaning his or her room.

On the other hand, slowly and carefully withdrawing our troops will not only encourage more Iraqi involvement, but will force it as well. Their security will depend on their own people taking responsibility.

President Bush maintains: “As the Iraqis stand up, we will stand down.” But how will we get the Iraqis to take charge if we send more American soldiers to do their job? His logic is critically flawed, and the people paying the most for his failed judgment are the American soldiers (whom Republicans say they support) who have to do all of the work.

Any withdrawal we push for must not be immediate; it would undoubtedly leave Iraq vulnerable without time to prepare, while a phased withdrawal gives Iraqis time to prepare themselves as we remove our troops slowly.

Putting more American soldiers in harm’s way will not fix the situation, but only worsen conditions. The Iraqis have been standing down for far too long; it’s time we start asking more of them. To do this, we must not ask our own soldiers to take the part of Iraqi soldiers in maintaining the defense of their own nation.

> Comments