As the president today explains where progress has been made in Iraq, and where the Iraqi government has failed to meet our expectations, it seems apparent that what we're doing is not working. I'm not speaking of Operation Phantom Thunder ('the surge'), where this magazine has chronicled the steady progress of operations to date, and the promise those operations hold for restoring order to Iraq. No, I'm talking about the attempt to explain the mission--and build support for it--here at home. Despite the encouraging signs--and acknowledging the false starts and problems--polls show that the American people are tired of hearing about Iraq and our losses there.

That's understandable. As the White House has frequently pointed out, the Iraq war is costing this country in both treasure and lives. Further, a significant part of both the political class and the media have staked their reputations and futures on a failure in Iraq. Given all this, the challenge for those who see the value of what we're doing, and who believe that Iraq can succeed, is to find a way to change the debate. Quin Hillyer of the American Spectator has a good piece that gets us started toward thinking outside the frame of the current debate:

The first approach would be to try changing the terms of debate by new communications strategies and tactics. Somehow, some way, create a new narrative. Pull in outside communications advisors, perhaps, and figure out a way to tell the stories of this war's heroes -- its Audie Murphys, its Sergeant Yorks, its Andrew Jacksons or (to bolster the idea that we still do have allies) even its Lafayettes. Trumpet the successes in Iraq -- the hospitals built, the schools opened, the new businesses started...

Enlist somebody respected to make the case for staying the course. Find some retired Democratic senators, perhaps -- Sam Nunn and Bob Kerrey, if they will do it -- or some universally admired retired athletes such as Arnold Palmer or Lance Armstrong, and have them make the case for finishing the job...

A second approach would be actually to do something dramatic. A brand-new diplomatic offensive against Iran, for instance. Find a way to enlist Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, or other nations of the region who worry about Iranian hegemony, in an embargo or some other strong measure against Iran -- backed, if necessary, by a credible threat of military force, such as precision strikes on support facilities for Iranian nuclear plants...

A third approach would be to create new benchmarks for success in Iraq. In other words, redefine the intermediate goals of the surge to highlight achievements that are well on the way to being realized

Fourth, the administration might work to "flip" noted skeptics over to the administration's position. What if some careful nurturing could convince James Baker and Lee Hamilton of the Iraq Study Group that it is worth their while to embrace the surge publicly in all its particulars? What if a prominent newspaper's editorial board could be convinced to change its tune based on evidence from the war zone?

There must be a way, somehow, to shake up the political situation here in the United States so as to buy the time necessary for military successes to become apparent. Again, that's the whole idea: to buy time, politically, in order for the surge to work.

You can argue whether any (or all) of these ideas will work. But there's no question that the viability of the American presence in Iraq is threatened. This ought to concern all of us--even those who are working hardest to 'bring the troops home' as soon as possible. After all, the U.S. will continue to have interests in the Middle East beyond the Iraq mission. In particular, this nation cannot afford for Iraq to fall apart and become the base of operations that al Qaeda would have it be. There are plenty of other reasons to work for a pluralist democracy in Iraq--not least out of humanitarian concern for a people who until recently groveled under Saddam's boot. (After all, if we 'want peace,' aren't we supposed to 'work for justice?')

Read Hillyer's whole piece, and see if you can find a way to build on his ideas. Another way to 'change the debate' would be to enable Americans to hear from the Iraqis whose lives have experienced an immeasurable change for the better. Whether through YouTube, free and paid media, or a tour of America by some representative Iraqis, Americans would like to hear more from the people that they liberated. Their voices might add a lot to our domestic discussion.