On the noz:

it’s become pretty clear that the purpose of the american military presence in iraq is having an american military presence in iraq. there doesn’t seem to be any consistent goal other than that any more. which is why these days there’s so much talk about staying and less talk about what staying is supposed to accomplish. staying is the accomplishment; it’s the end, not the means.

Of course, there are best case scenarios, like the one laid out by Abu Aardvark:

Without getting into his arguments or my reservations, I just wanted to lay out [Stephen] Biddle’s best case scenario as he presented it: if everything goes right and if the US continues to “hit the lottery” with the spread of local ceasefires and none of a dozen different spoilers happens, then a patchwork of local ceasefires between heavily armed, mistrustful communities could possibly hold if and only if the US keeps 80,000-100,000 troops in Iraq for the next twenty to thirty years. And that’s the best case scenario of one of the current strategy’s smartest supporters. Man.

This kind of stuff helps put happy-talk in perspective:

I see the results everywhere. Throughout Baghdad, shops and street markets are open late again, taking advantage of the fine November weather. Parks are crowded with strollers, and kids play soccer on the streets. Traffic has resumed its customary epic snarl. The Baghdad Zoo is open, and caretakers have even managed to bring in two lionesses to replace the menagerie that escaped in the early days of the war (and was hunted down by U.S. soldiers).

The Zoo is open and kids are playing soccer. But for every happy story, there is realism:

Police said the attack occurred as U.S. soldiers were handing out toys, sports equipment and other treats in a playground near Baqouba, 35 miles northeast of Baghdad.

Few details were available, but the U.S. military said it was a “suicide vest attack” and that three American soldiers were killed.

Rasoul Issam, 16, said he and his friends were playing soccer when the U.S. soldiers called to them from their vehicles to come get gifts.

“We ran toward them and I caught a ball when suddenly an explosion took place about 20 meters (yards) from us,” Issam said from his hospital bed in Baqouba.

Mohammed Sabah, 11, was hit by shrapnel in his hand and chest.

“The soldiers gave me pens and I thanked them. After this the explosion took place and I was hit by shrapnel,” he said. “The second thing I remember is being in the hospital.”

The deaths raised to at least 3,870 members of the U.S. military who have died since the Iraq war started in March 2003, according to an Associated Press count.

It’s important to remember that we have no mission in Iraq except to try to prevent the collapse of the central government. Noz correctly dismisses that as any real explanation for why our troops are still there. They are there because they are supposed to be there. That’s why Bush sent them there. To stay.

And that continues to be their mission:

For now, though, Mr. Bush told the author, Robert Draper, in a later session, “I’m playing for October-November.” That is when he hopes the Iraq troop increase will finally show enough results to help him achieve the central goal of his remaining time in office: “To get us in a position where the presidential candidates will be comfortable about sustaining a presence,” and, he said later, “stay longer.”

That’s why we disbanded the Iraqi Army. Without them, our army became indispensable. We had to stay. And stay we will, unless we elect Chris Dodd, Bill Richardson, Dennis Kucinich, or, perhaps, Barack Obama or John Edwards.

How long do you want to keep troops in Iraq?