So... why are we in Iraq, then?

For those keeping score, the Bush Administration has now abandoned every single rationale for the invasion of Iraq.

The Washington Post has an extraordinary story this morning in which an unnamed senior administration official acknowledges that literally nothing the president used to sell the war has or ever had any basis in reality.

The United States no longer expects to see a model new democracy, a self-supporting oil industry or a society in which the majority of people are free from serious security or economic challenges, U.S. officials say.

"What we expected to achieve was never realistic given the timetable or what unfolded on the ground," said a senior official involved in policy since the 2003 invasion. "We are in a process of absorbing the factors of the situation we're in and shedding the unreality that dominated at the beginning."

To recap:

- Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11
- Iraq was not a haven for terrorists
- Iraq had no relationship with Al Qaeda
- Iraq had no chemical or biological weapons
- Iraq had no nuclear weapons
- Iraq had no viable plans to develop chemical, biological or nuclear weapons.

And now, after the invading force uncovered none of the above, Bush is no longer committed even to giving the Iraqi people a stable, secure, democratic government.

So, why are we there?