Remember back in the days of Vietnam when President Nixon went through the "Vietnamization" process while he slowly pulled our troops out of Vietnam. The Vietnamese were being trained to take over what we were trying to accomplish all the while our troop strength was dwindling.

I would wager that this will be the "out" in Iraq. "Train" the police force, turn over the gov't on June 30th, and then slowly get our troops the hell out of there. Of course, we all know that it will be total chaos and civil war afterwards, however at least our country could say we turned it over to them trained and prepared with "good conscience".

I predicted all this mess before the war began, and I am now predicting this.

Comments?

I believe we will be staying in-country to help them with the military, even though we are turning the government over to them.

Yes, it would be a gross strategic oversight to not establish a permanent military presence within Iraq.

I imagine that the main purpose of this base will be to "train" domestic forces in police and military doctrine, while housing a significant garrison due to the unstable socio-political situation in Iraq at large.

Once the power-vacuum has been filled with at least marginally cooperative religious leaders, I imagine the US will establish a permanent lease on their base similar to Guantanamo Bay. This would help to ensure the government of Iraq is moderately cooperative with US strategic interests.

In the future, as Iraq starts to reap the benefits of its oil reserves (c. 20~35 years), I see Iraq developing a strong and religiously unaffiliated middle class that will direct the Iraqi government toward a more moderate, democratic type affair.

Until then, i anticipate at least 5 years of religious conflict, followed by at least 15 years of the US yoke chaffing at their collar.

In 60 years, Iraq will be 1st world and have politics closely resembling our own domestically.

This is just the way I'd do it, but i dont imagine anyone else trying it another way.