More Iraqi troops? A good idea in theory, but in reality?

I'm just back from the US, despite the best efforts of United Airlines to make a mess of my flight home. What a difference a few years makes, as I struggled to hear anyone say anything positive about either Bush or Iraq. A few years ago when I questioned the intelligence of invading, I was called anti-American, as if questioning the support of an invasion with no evidence was somehow anti-American. Now, even the most loyal Republicans that I met were overflowing with negativity towards the war and unflattering words for Bush. Even as I overhead conversations on the trains, I heard lots of complaints about the failures and incompetence of the administration.

What struck me as especially interesting (though depressing) was a conversation I had with a family member of a US soldier who served in Iraq. I think that I now see where the missing $800M has gone over there, or at least a chunk of it. This person told me that on patrols in Iraq when US (and Iraqi) soldiers encountered insurgents, they would be fighting against well trained people who were all too often geared up in American uniforms and weapons that were provided to the Iraqi army. How can we ask American troops to engage an enemy that is equipped by America? What a bizarre situation and it unfortunately highlights the failures of this administration and Congress to offer any oversight.

So now when I read that the US wants more Iraqi troops, I wonder where the hell they have been so far, what has taken them so long and can we afford to equip more of them only to see them pass on everything they have to the other side? Who hasn't had enough of this rubbish?