President Bush has put forth an order for 20,000 new troops to be sent to Iraq in 2007. This number has put the president at odds with Congress and a majority of the population who oppose the war. Many are angry that there is to be a troop increase when there is a widespread call for withdrawal. However, a troop increase is necessary to finish up business we started in that country.

Misguided arguments place blame on an unstable region to begin with, and a populace inherited from a corrupt regime. Other opposition blames false pretenses and dishonorable goals from the beginning of the invasion.

The simple truth is that America is involved, and is largely responsible for the condition Iraq is in right now. If we wish to continue referring to ourselves as a world leader, we must take responsibility for everything that has taken place in that country since our invasion in March of 2003. Placing the blame on our allies, or the faulty Iraqi government is unbecoming for the flagship nation of democracy.

If we want to keep the mantle of world leader, we need to act like one. Passing the blame and backing out of responsibilities is not the kind of behavior accepted at any managerial level. Calling for withdrawal due to our own troop casualties is irresponsible and immoral.

When we invaded that country in March of 2003, we took responsibility for the future welfare of its civilians. However, since we invaded, the lawlessness that we have been unable to control and the insurgency that has spread has contributed to an unfair amount of casualties settling on the Iraqi civilian population.

The Bush administration has handled the war rashly and without a sense of internal accountability. Although his call for a troop increase is the correct thing to do in this current situation, it is far too low a number, and it is a pandering attempt.

20,000 is a safe middle number. The fact that it is called a “troop increase” will appease the casual supporter of the administration. At the same time, the relatively low number of 20,000 troops will anger the war critics who would be unhappy regardless of Bush’s decisions but would not incense them to a boiling point.

This number is far too low. In military assessments, respected military leaders have decided that 30,000 is the bare minimum needed for success in Iraq considering the current civil war situation. The ideal number of troops is 100,000. If a troop surge is the method the administration wants to use to draw this war to a close, then their surge is far too tricklish to be helpful. All this does is commit a greater number of troops to failure.

We need enough troops in the region to not only fight the growing insurgency and quell the civil war, but also to train the fledgling Iraqi defense forces. Forcing the short-handed troops who are there right now to pull double duty on these tasks only prolongs the war, which subsequently increases the hostilities.

There is a mess in Iraq; a civil war, and it is partly our fault. It is easy to take the high-minded approach and brag about how we saved them from an unjust ruler or dismiss that we didn’t support the war in the first place. The fact is that our leaders weren’t farsighted and honest enough to ensure there would be peace after Saddam was gone, and that despite ideological differences, we are a country bound by our responsibility to this period in history.

Responsibility is a two-way street, when we are willing to be responsible for our part in the mess in the middle east, we can demand accountability and action from other parties who have affected the situation there.

There are realistic standards for success, and we have not kept our end of them. We have gone into situations with bravado and have left messes. There is a mess in Afghanistan because we did not spend enough time and effort there to ensure lasting stability. Now we are playing catch up in that country while we attempt to prop up our shoddy plans in Iraq.

Soldiers are what is needed to complete this mission. 20,000 troops is enough to fix what is wrong in Baghdad alone. A troop surge of at least 30,000-100,000 troops is going to be needed to get the country fixed and running, and get our soldiers out of there.

Pulling out of the country now would only burden us with further responsibility and guilt for a convoluted mess. A trickle of new troops will only prolong the disaster. Only by a swift and formidable troop increase can we end this battle swiftly and decisively, and then America can move on as a country.