The news from Iraq: all bad

WashPost: “Civil war in Iraq near, Annan says”
WashPost: “Bush to Press Iraqi PM on Sectarian Violence”
NY Times: “Hezbollah Said to Help Shiite Army in Iraq”
WashPost: “Anbar Picture Grows Clearer, and Bleaker”

Even the conservative commentators are discouraged:

Christopher Hitchens: “The objectionable thing about the proposed Baker-Hamilton "talks" is not that they are talks but that they give the impression of looking for someone to whom to surrender.”

Stanley Kurtz: “I’m afraid the notion that elections were bringing us democracy has been largely wish fulfillment. Purple fingers notwithstanding, voters weren’t thinking nationally, much less liberally. They were voting communally. And with armed non-governmental militias at large, this amounted to voting for quasi-secessionist entities.”

And Mark Levin: “Nobody is talking about victory. We had many very severe setbacks during all of our major wars, from the Revolutionary and Civil Wars to World Wars I and II. Our country brought together the greatest minds NOT to devise ways to hold discussions/negotiations with the enemy, but to develop strategies to defeat them. That doesn't exist today, or if it does, those voices are drowned out by a variety of "I told you so" claims.”

Radical groups like Hezbollah and Hamas gain popular support because they often provide services that national governments cannot (or do not). The weakness of the Malaki government is that it can't do anything right, even with the strength of the U.S. military behind it. Forget about "standing up" - they haven't learned to crawl yet.