Here are some cold hard facts about the situation in Iraq that war supporters will be quick to ignore as reported by the New York Times:

The number of Iraqis fleeing their homes has soared since the American troop increase began in February, according to data from two humanitarian groups, accelerating the partition of the country into sectarian enclaves.

Despite some evidence that the troop buildup has improved security in certain areas, sectarian violence continues and American-led operations have brought new fighting, driving fearful Iraqis from their homes at much higher rates than before the tens of thousands of additional troops arrived, the studies show.

The data track what are known as internally displaced Iraqis: those who have been driven from their neighborhoods and seek refuge elsewhere in the country rather than fleeing across the border. The effect of this vast migration is to drain religiously mixed areas in the center of Iraq, sending Shiite refugees toward the overwhelmingly Shiite areas to the south and Sunnis toward majority Sunni regions to the west and north.

War supporters credit the surge with reducing the overall level of violence in Iraq. This dubious assertion is an integral component of the deceptive marketing campaign that the administration, its collaborator pundits, and their sockpuppets in the right-wing blogosophere have been faithfully regurgitating as part of their strategy to play out the clock on the Iraq War and dump the whole disaster on the next President (who will almost assuredly be a Democrat). The message that the surge is "working" has also been faithfully repeated in most of the MSM without any real substantive and critical analysis.

Reports from credible relief organizations like the Iraqi Red Crescent contradict the administration's slick marketing message on the surge. If the surge has succeeded in anything it is in accelerating the massive dislocation of Iraqis from their homes. On the positive side, neighborhoods that have been cleansed in this matter provide less opportunity for Shiite militias and Sunni insurgent groups to launch deadly attacks aimed at innocent civilians of the opposing sect.

If one had a conspiratorial mindset, one might believe that this consequence was actually an intended goal of the surge. By promoting sectarian cleansing and arming the Sunni insurgents (the old "pay them off over there so we don't have to fight them over here" deal) the administration may be laying the groundwork for the eventual partition of Iraq.

Partition isn't very popular among the Iraqi people, but may in fact be the best way to separate the warring parties and restore some stability to the country. The new Sunni state could help serve as a buffer against the expansion of Iranian influence that George Bush has facilitated by toppling the most effective check on the Iranians: the regime of Saddam Hussein.

The biggest problem with partition is Baghdad itself which the Shiites will almost certainly try to grab. This could result in a sectarian bloodbath in the capital and a major dislocation of Baghdad's remaining Sunni population. Then, of course there is the anticipated struggle over the fate of Kirkuk.

Whatever happens will be a far cry from the neoconservative wet dream of reshaping the Middle East in the image of America. It's high time to bring our troops home and leave the fate of Iraq to the Iraqis themselves to decide. Our continued presence only delays the inevitable day of reckoning.