Bucky posted this comment at Glenn Greenwald:

What if there is a well defined mission in Iraq, but the leadership can not share it directly with the American people? What if the mission is simply to destroy the Arab states of the middle east? If it is, then we are doing "the job" and the speeches are just to cover up the real mission.

I added:
You're probably on to something important. pretending for the sake of argument that the #1 US goal is to prevent a nuclear device from being used on us and the second most imnportant goal is to maintain control over the oil supplies. Since our soldiers have sufficient weaponry to operate in a war zone, even if they are unable to control events on the ground or prevent the civil war from proceeding at its current deadly pace, by simply remaining they are accomplishing their mission, and any talk of democracy or stability or and end game of any kind is just sugar coating for the folks back home (and the parents, wives and friends of the soldiers in question).Same deal if we go into Iran. Stability is not required. A freindly regime is not required. Chaos is fine as long as it keeps our "enemies" unable to operate freely.

Joshua Micah Marshall has more:

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/011888.php