paradox?

so i accidentally came across bush's press conference today on my way to the gym. and even though i only caught a little of it, he said something that stuck in my mind. he made some comment to the effect of: can you imagine that there are enemies out there who say they will kill innocent people because they want to spread freedom. and i immediately thought: yes, yes i can. even though our military doesn't expressly name it as their objective, the death of innocent people has been a huge by-product of our action in iraq. and, that toll was calculated before we invaded, so, in a way, it was accepted as a means to the ultimate goal - which is exactly what insurgents are aiming to do.

but i've thought about the war a lot lately, just because the debate over withdrawal seems to be intensifying. i find it hard to believe, but i currently admire bush for sticking to his plan to keep troops in iraq. though people want to now say that we've accomplished our goal and the country needs to deal with its own internal civil war, i believe that would be reprehensible. rummy wrote an op-ed in the wp that said leaving now would be like leaving post-ww2 germany to the nazis, and i have to agree. we have a responsibility to stay in iraq until the country is really on its way - economically, politically, socially. after what we did, we owe it to them.