With the horrible carnage in Iraq continuing (11 U.S. soldiers and at least 130 Iraqis were killed yesterday; 43 U.S. soldiers have died just in the 20 days since the Iraqi elections), I read a column in Wednesday's Financial Times written by former Senator Gary Hart. Hart is no radical. He asks a very important question: is the U.S. planning to have permanent army bases in Iraq?

As Hart writes, "Any attempt to find out whether the U.S. is, or is not, constructing permanent military bases meets with frustration. The few who have attempted to get a direct answer to this question are met with evasion and purposeful confusion over that is or is not "permanent. But this is the ultimate test of true Bush Administration intentions in Iraq. If we are, in fact, constructing permanent bases, 'leaving' simply means a reduction of forces and the permanent stationing of US brigades in Iraq."

We need an immediate, clear answer to this question: is the U.S. contructing permanent military bases in Iraq and, if so, for what purpose?" As Hart writes, "The art of deception does not require outright lies. It may simply lie in refusing to reveal the truth, the art of the trick." And, yet, there seems to be no inclination on the part of the Democratic Party--and certainly, not my opponent--to push the issue and demand an answer.