President Bush will announce later this week his plans to reduce troop levels in Iraq by about 30,000, effectively ending the so-called military surge in Iraq, the Associated Press reported. Claiming progress on a few security fronts, the president, along with his ambassador and commanding general in Iraq, seeks to legitimize a failed strategy that has been unpopular from the start. When Bush announced his plans for the surge shortly after the 2006 midterm elections, he stressed the need for more time to give the fledgling Iraqi government a chance to build an operable coalition of the differing political factions in the wartorn country. Instead, the Iraqi parliament went on vacation for the entire month of August, prompting White House Press Secretary Tony Snow to excuse them at a press briefing by saying, “You know, it’s 130 degrees in Baghdad in August.” No, Tony, excuse us for not being deceived by the stay-the-course strategy the president has employed. The surge was implemented not as a means to buy the Iraqis time but to buy the administration time – in fact, it appears just enough time to pass on the quagmire to the new administration beginning January 2009. Now that the surge has ended, President Bush will simply wait out the clock until the next president takes over, comfortable with the knowledge that if Democrats have not forced him to change course already, they likely won’t be able to force it now. If a new president finally heeds the wishes of the American people and withdraws from Iraq, whatever chaos that ensues will conveniently be blamed on the defeatists who surrendered Iraq to the terrorists, not the fools who began it in the first place. Hopefully, the American people are wise enough to see through this charade. If the recent AP poll is any indication, they will. A solid 59 percent of Americans think history will judge the Iraq war as “a partial or complete failure.” Logic dictates the failure of the surge. If it were a success, why would Bush and his general allow for troop withdrawals? But even they acknowledge the lack of political progress, which was the point of the surge in the first place. If the surge actually was a failure, then why hasn’t the administration seen the folly of the general troop presence? Either way, it appears the public must endure more of the same in Iraq. Surge or no surge, the justification for troops in Iraq has quickly worn out its welcome.