The number of trained Iraqi troops, the troops who will take the place of ours, is the single most critical number relative to Iraq. It is the number which determines when our troops can come home. To illustrate the variability in the numbers, Condoleeza Rice, at her confirmation hearings in January, said there were 120,000 Iraqi troops trained, while Democrat Joe Biden claimed there were only 3000.

It seemed incredible that there was no agreement at the highest levels of our government on such a basic and absolutely critical piece of data. In the end I assumed Rice was lying when she corroborated her number only by saying, "I have to rely on what I was told," while Biden said he had gone over to Iraq and talked to those who were actually doing the training. Both relied on hearsay but Biden was far closer to the source and seemed far more confident in his number.

The number came up again the other night, eight months later, when I saw two retired Republican Generals, still with extensive contacts in Iraq, on TV. They were there to provide the inside scoop on how many Iraqi troops were actually trained to the point where they could operate independently of American troops.

They both looked sheepishly and sadly into the camera while admitting that only two battalions were actually trained.

At the time it did not mean much to me as I didn't know what a battalion was. It turns out that an Iraqi battalion is only 700 men! This means that thus far we've only trained 1400 of the 200,000 or so men that would be needed to hold the country together in our absence. I assume, if there were 50,000 or even 20,000, the administration would be making it clear, loudly and often, but they are not.

It seems that the Administration has no optimistic numbers floating around. There is talk of the Transition Readiness Assessment. This is the latest methodology by which Iraqi troops are now  assessed for readiness. Here is the way it seems to turn out: "of 81 Iraqi army battalions assessed, only three were rated green, able to conduct operations independently." By that estimate there are 2100 troops trained, but that too is almost nothing.

This means almost certainly that we are losing, and that probably we cannot win—ever. The Iraqi people won't fight for us. When Dick Cheney said very recently, "we are witnessing the last throes of the insurgency," when in fact the insurgency looks far stronger than ever, you had to think this is Vietnam all over again.

As much as I love Republican Jeffersonian Libertarian philosophy, it is hard to imagine how such pure delusion can serve that purpose over the long run. When General Casey, once the Pentagon's top man in Iraq, said in January, "we may never be able to train enough Iraqis," he was apparently right.

So what do we do now? For starters, where does the tough talking and proud Bush Administration find the courage to change course? After all, we don't want a badly conceived and poorly executed tactic in the war on terror giving the Democrats, who have nothing to offer but anti-Americanism, an opportunity—if only an opportunity by default.

Ted Baiamonte is a proud Republican and author of "Understanding the Difference Between Democrats and Republicans". His blog is The Dumb Democrat, and he can be reached at bje1000@aol.com.

---