Wow, you're trying to steal bases in both directions.
1. I never said "must".
2. You, and others here, are doing far more than "asking questions about the battleplan".
All citizens of the United States have a legitimate right to discuss this issue in good faith regardless of how it is "acutally affecting" any individual.
That's true and I do not question your "right" to say anything under the sun. What I question is on what basis you present Iraq as crisis which requires a drastic alteration in something we are doing. Usually such a view is based on something, but in the case of you and 99% of other Iraq chicken-littles, it's not. It's not based on anything of substance. (Someone blew up a building - accomplishing nada of military value - and that's enough to make some squishy Americans go "ooh" and "aah" and throw up their hands. A building! For crying out loud!)
Now, to be clear, that's fine, I mean that's your "right" to push the panic button based on nothing of substance. Meanwhile it's my "right" to wonder why you're doing so, and so I have. See? :-)
Further, all citizens of a free state have the right to question how long a war will continue
Again, the question is not one of "rights". I am not questioning anyone's "right" to say things! And actually, on this question, it has been asked and answered: we don't know and no honest person can state how long this war will continue. That is the answer to your question. Either deal with it, or not, but at least have the alertness to recognize that your question has been answered: nobody knows how long it will continue.
Before you fire back with a "Well, that's just not acceptable!", let me remind you that very very rarely in all of human history have nations fought wars whose length they knew in advance. It is the norm not the exception to not know how long a war will continue. It is a mark of how truly spoiled and pampered we are that some percentage of our citizens now actually expects our leaders to be able to say in advance that "this war will last X more months" or whatever. Just think about it.
You're right - I really don't care about what kind of government they end up with, as long as all of those who would attack our country are killed.
So actually, we have very similar goals then. Killing those who would attack our country (before they have a chance to gain power) is a big reason why we still need a troop presence there. Yet some people, even here, advocate a pullout. Inexplicable.
Al Qaeda is in Iraq. They've even been considerate enough to label their franchise there (drumroll) "Al Qaeda in Iraq". Do you remember Al Qaeda? Do the Buchananites on this thread remember Al Qaeda? That's the organization which committed an act of war against our country. They are operating in Iraq, which has a power vaccuum.
So, I ask you: what better place for our military to be stationed? Where would you rather our military be? South Dakota? Should we cede Iraq to Al Qaeda? Let them take over Iraq because it's so "lost", because it's "taking so long"?
I just don't get it.
What does it matter to you? How would it affect you, really, if we killed two or three or ten million civilians in the course of this war?
I'd feel pretty bad about it, I reckon. If I could tell myself that it was done out of some huge necessity or urgency (as with, I believe, the nuking of Japan, preventing a more bloody invasion), then maybe I could assuage that guilt. But there is no such urgency or necessity which is why I keep asking you why you think there is, capisce?