Last November, the American people sent President Bush an unmistakeable message: The war in Iraq has been a tragic mistake and it's time to end it. From east to west, north to south, they expressed their conviction through votes that threw out the majorities in both houses of Congress. In exit interviews and polls everywhere, they made it clear that the reason for the voter revolt was the Iraq war.

A month later, in December, one of the most extraordinary blue ribbon panels ever assembled, after months of study and discussion, issued its review of Iraq policy and a detailed set of recommendations for how to change course. Representing top military, diplomatic, and political strategists from both parties, the panel was a good-faith effort to take the war out of the realm of partisanship and into the realm of problem-solving. The Baker Report, as it's being called, had two main recommendations: to begin a draw-down of U. S. forces this year, and to rely more on diplomatic efforts and less on military force—even with the regimes we find troublesome in the area, such as Iran and Syria.

President Bush then made a great show of retiring to Camp David to reflect on what to do. His decision, when it came, was stunning.

Rather than begin to reduce U. S. troop commitments, he decided to increase them by 20,000 troops. That's 20,000 more U.S. soldiers who will be in harm's way in the most dangerous of Iraq's cities—Baghdad—and potentially in its most dangerous neighborhoods, like Sadr City, which is controlled by the Muqtada al-Sadr and his implacably anti-American militia.

And rather than attempt diplomatic contacts with Iran and Syria, President Bush did the exact opposite. He made new saber-rattling threats of military force against those two countries. To many commentators, this was the most frightening element of his speech, which threatens to involve the United States even more deeply against a nation much bigger than Iraq and more hostile.

The President talked less about "victory" than he has for the last several years. Instead, he talked about "success" and "succeeding in Iraq." What the difference is, however, he didn't explain. We fear it's just a matter of words and that the President, with Vice President Dick Cheney still at his elbow, remains enveloped in a cloud of misguided belief that somehow this situation can be solved militarily.

Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois had it right in his response to the President's speech. We've done what we can for Iraq. Our troops, though poorly led by the politicians, have sacrificed again and again to rid the country of an ugly dictator and to try to keep the peace against terrible odds (which should have been predicted). They've done their best. It's time to start bringing them home, not sending more of them.