Why are we still in Iraq?

So let me get this straight McG;
The US went into Iraq to get rid of Saddam.
The US went into Iraq to provide Iraqi's with jobs on drill sites.
The US went into Iraq to provide Iraqi's with jobs on Haliburton's payroll.
The US went into Iraq to provide Iraqi's with jobs on Haliburton oil derricks.
The US went into Iraq to provide Iraqi's with jobs on pipelines and shipping docks.
The US went into Iraq to provide Iraqi's with taxes from their own resources.
The US spent several hundred billion dollars to give Iraqi's jobs--jobs that would have otherwise been held by, who, Iranians?
The US army lost several thousand American lives to provide Iraqi's with employment that would have otherwise gone to who, Syrians?

Surely you aren't suggesting that the big winner in this war is Iraq and the big loser is the US.

But, all that aside, lets suppose for a moment all the hyperbole were true and that haliburton gets some lucrative oil contracts in Iraq. Lets look at that, shall we?

lets suppose for a moment all the hyperbole were true and that haliburton gets some lucrative oil contracts in Iraq. Lets look at that, shall we?

While no single, comprehensive system currently tracks governmentwide Iraq reconstruction contract data, available data showed that from October 1, 2003, through March 31, 2006, DOD, USAID, and State collectively awarded the majority of Iraq reconstruction contracts competitively. Based on competition information we obtained on $10 billion of the total $11.6 billion in IRRF obligations by these agencies during the period of our review, we found that about $9.1 billion--or 91 percent--was for competitively awarded contracts. While our ability to obtain complete competition data for all DOD Iraq reconstruction contract actions was limited because not all DOD components consistently tracked or fully reported this information, we obtained information on approximately $7 billion, or 82 percent, of DOD's total Iraq reconstruction contract obligations, and of this, we found that competition occurred for nearly all of the obligations. Additionally, based on complete data for the period of our review we found that USAID competitively awarded contract actions for 99 percent of its obligations, while State awarded contract actions competitively for only 10 percent of its obligations. GAO reviewed the files for 51 contract actions totaling $1.55 billion--22 of which were awarded noncompetitively and 29 of which were awarded competitively--almost all of which contained proper documentation. One contract file--for a noncompetitively awarded task order issued by State--did not contain justifications or other required documentation. DOD was also unable to provide documentation for 4 of the competitively awarded contract actions. Of the 22 noncompeted contract actions in GAO's review, State should have notified Congress of 2 actions awarded using other than full and open competition in accordance with notification requirements but did not. State officials told GAO that they have taken steps to address the problem. GAO did not identify any DOD or USAID contract actions within the sample that required notification.