Tenacious D(emocracy): Let's Have Iraqis Vote on US Troops in Iraq

Did you catch any of the Bush-Maliki press conference from Amman?

It was the frostiest joint statement since Britney and K-Fed put their acrimonious split-up on the back burner to deny they'd made a sex tape.

Bush and Maliki barely made eye contact and, according to the New York Times, at one point, the Iraqi PM "shot Mr. Bush an incredulous look." Reading a memo suggesting you might be "ignorant of what is going on" can really put the chill on a relationship. Not unlike seeing your wife canoodling with Borat.

The news conference was very substance-and-specifics-lite, with no details on how an agreed upon speeded-up transfer of security responsibility from US to Iraqi forces would actually take place, and no announcement of any benchmarks, milestones, goal, or criteria by which we can determine if things are progressing.

In fact, Maliki kept the specifics for after the meeting, when he told ABC News that the Iraqis would be ready to assume control of their security in six months. That's pretty significant coming from the democratically elected leader of a sovereign country. Especially since the president's main theme during the press conference was democracy, with Bush returning to it again and again. It was clearly the talking point du jour.

So we heard repeated mentions that "our goal" in Iraq is a "free and democratic Iraq." Repeated mentions of how America's continued involvement in Iraq comes at "the request of a sovereign government elected by the people," a government "chosen by the Iraqi people through free elections." Repeated mentions of the 12 million Iraqi voters who "defied terrorists to cast their ballots" and to "express their desires, their wishes." And, of course, the now-obligatory assertion that terrorists "can't stand democracies" (apparently, neither can the Iranians: "I believe the Iranians fear democracy," said the president).

Bush also dismissed the idea that "there's going to be some kind of graceful exit out of Iraq" (god forbid!), insisting "We're going to stay in Iraq to get the job done so long as the government wants us there."

Well, it appears Maliki's government wants us out six months from now. And what about the Iraqi people, those purple-fingered symbols of democracy in action? What about what they want?

If Bush is all about the Tenacious D(emocracy), why not have the Iraqi people "express their desires and wishes" and hold a plebiscite on the most pressing question facing the country: Should the United States withdraw its troops from Iraq -- Yes or No? (Talk about your Pick of Destiny).

The problem for Bush is that actual democracy in action can be a very messy thing. A poll taken in September indicates that an overwhelming majority of Iraqis want us out. According to a national survey conducted by the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland, 74 percent of Shiites and 91 percent of Sunnis want American troops withdrawn within a year. And by a wide margin, both factions believe the US military presence in Iraq provokes more violence than it prevents.

Most troubling of all is the report's finding that 61 percent of Iraqis approve of attacks on U.S. forces. Coming out in favor of blowing up American soldiers is certainly one way of expressing your desires and wishes.

It's been nearly a year since those 12 million Iraqis last went to the polls. Twelve very long months in which a lot has happened that might affect the will of the people Bush is so fond of lauding. That election was before the bombing of the Golden Mosque in Samarra. Before Haditha broke. Before Mahmudiyah. Before the failure of operation Together Forward. Before Iraqi civilian deaths hit above 100 a day.

Think those might have changed the mood of the electorate?

Let's put democracy to the test in Iraq and find out.

Follow Arianna Huffington on Twitter: www.twitter.com/ariannahuff