Some people are asking the question of whether or not we should pull all our troops out now and leave the rebuilding and restructuring of Iraq up to the U.N.

To which I say: What are you smoking?

I don't think the U.N. could organize a high school prom, much less the security and restructuring of a country. Can somebody give me a rundown on their past experience and qualifications in doing so?

And many people are griping that the 140,000 troops we have in Iraq aren't enough. You want to pull all those out, and please tell me, where the hell is the U.N. going to drum up comparable levels? From member countries? Give me a break.

I'm not saying we're doing a great job so far. I think things are shaky. And I think we've half-assed it somewhat in Afghanistan, too. I think our only hope is a massive investment and commitment to both Afghanistan and Iraq, in terms of rebuilding infrastructure and establishing democratic governments.

We have models for doing so in both postwar Germany and Japan, but as far as I can tell, we are not really following those models. We seem to worried about the perception that we're bullies and occupiers that we're not engaging full-bore in the restructuring process (though I'd say we're doing this much more in Iraq, while Afghanistan seems to have just been propped up into a semi-stable state).

Now I believe both of these countries can be rebuilt into functioning democracies, but I wouldn't trust the U.N. to do it anymore than I'd trust a lobotomy patient to babysit my kids.

We and the Brits (and a few other friends) went in there, so the responsibility is ours. Besides, I don't think any other country or organization is capable of rebuilding Iraq. Whether or not we actually do it remains to be seen, and it may actually take years to look back and objectively evaluate the progress, or lack thereof.