Harping on a unimportant fact just shows how desperate the war hawks are. They can't win the larger battle of Iraq policy therefore they manufacture skirmishes that are irrelevant. There are Islamic terrorists in Iraq. That makes them dangerous enough. The important issue is how the Iraqis will take charge of their own country and whether or not it makes sense for the United States to occupy Iraq.

I think it's a bit more important than that. If we are to understand the world we live in and the enemy which is against us, we need to understand who is who.

If we want to make sensible, thoughtful Iraq policy, including a sensible, thoughtful exit from Iraq (which by the way everyone wants; we're all just arguing over how and when), then we need to know who's who in Iraq.

It maddens me to hear not just common citizens, but politicians running for president no less, who demand that we fight "the ones who attacked us on 9/11." At this point that is a purely political stand, not a tactical or strategic argument. I hope to hell they understand this in private.

How are the people we've been killing in Afghanistan since 2001 in any way related to that day of massacre? Remember, 18 out of 19 conspirators died in the commission of that atrocity, and there were probably no more than a handful of people who led that conspiracy, many of whom have already been killed and captured, or have fled over the border. Why are we not just as concerned about "blowback" or "recruiting more terrorists," given our on-going war in Afghanistan? Because it's a "just" war? It's not just to Muslim fanatics.

I am not suggesting that we abandon Afghanistan, but I hope that the ones who demand that we "focus" on the "real enemy" have a clue about this breakdown in logic.

Here's the tragedy: we are fighting AQ in Iraq - who makes up a fairly small portion of the enemy - and we are losing.