Glad to see the grownups are running things now.

According to this WaPo article, the US is gearing up to finally let the UN handle some of the Iraq reconstruction. The problem is that Iraq is completely devoid of meaningful security. You know, back in the winter of 2002-2003, when my goverment told me there were WMD and a nuclear program in Iraq, I believed it. When it told me that these WMDs were not only violative of existing UN resolutions and posed a growing threat, I believed it. I mean, why would my government, in a post-Watergate, post-Lewinsky era, LIE to me about matters of such import? Not only that, but I certainly believed that these experienced people would devise a coherent plan decisively to win that war, and quickly bring peace and stability to this newly-occupied country. Wouldn't they? Well, as it turns out, they lied to me about WMDs, they lied to me about nuclear weapons, and they had absolutely no post-war plan. Just about anyone with half a brain can tell you that before you go into an adversarial situation, you analyze all of the possible outcomes and prepare for them. Obviously, the UN doesn't want to go near Iraq without some security. So, the US wants to put together a "New Global Force" to protect it. Among the countries the Bush administration is courting to join this force? France. (as Atrios asks, do they still call them "Freedom Fries" in the House cafeterias?). France, India and Pakistan, among others. Any Arab countries? No. Any of Iraq's neighbors? No. Turkey? No. Simply beyond inept, beyond pathetic. Over 600 US servicemen have died for what really has become a folly. I'd love for someone to explain, with a straight face, how the war in Iraq has made us safer from terrorism. Please.