There’s two aspects to this story. Seeing that almost twice as many American soldiers died in Iraq this past month than did Iraq soldiers is certainly bothersome in its own right. For the life of me I can think of a situation in which having more of your own die than the other military’s can be construed as a good thing.

The Associated Press count of U.S. military deaths for the month was 81, including a soldier who died from non-combat causes Friday. Figures compiled from officials in the Iraqi ministries of Defense, Health and Interior showed the Iraqi military toll was 44. The Iraqi figures showed that 165 Iraqi police were killed in March. Many of the police serve in paramilitary units.

Tiny numbers, really. The problem here is that the Iraqi military really doesn’t seem to be as involved as they should be. In light of the potential 2008 pullout date, this is troublesome. While they may be a few baby steps further along than they were, say, the day after the Saddam statue fell, I don’t believe they’re nearly far along enough that within a year or so they’ll be totally ready to be independent. The only hope I see is that the certainty of US force exit will force them to take the reigns themselves.

It’s also odd that we can still call this a “war” when 81 soldiers in a whopping month died. I’d like to know one other war that has yielded under 3,500 military deaths in four years. This isn’t a war. This is a police situation. To wit:

Additionally, the Iraqi ministry figures listed 1,872 Iraqi civilian deaths for the month, about 300 more than the AP tabulation, which is mainly gathered from daily police reports nationwide.

The civilian death toll for the month was down significantly from 2,172 in December, the highest month casualty figure since the AP began keeping records of civilian deaths in April 2005.

However, the number of civilians killed in March was in the same range as for the first two months of this year; 1,604 in January and 1,552 in February, according to the AP count.

1,900 deaths over 31 days is 61 per day. On average, as many citizens die daily in Iraq as do American soldiers in the full month. And who kills them? Is it another army? Another country invading? No, it’s rogues within the nation, a few undoubtedly with some weapons or money coming from Iran or elsewhere.

Consider Mexican illegals killing US citizens. Does that mean we’re having a war with Mexico? Are hate crimes indicative of a civil war that requires military intervention? Consider that we have seen claims that Iraq is safer than American cities, including recently that Iraq is as safe as Detroit.

During an interview Monday with WILS-AM, Rep. Tim Walberg said the returning troops he has talked with “indicate to me that 80 to 85 percent, in a conservative fashion, of the country is reasonably under control, at least as well as Detroit or Chicago or any of our other big cities. That’s an encouraging sign.”

Were this true (and I’m dubious on that), then why is this considered a war? If the civilian death count is lower than in American cities, and the deaths are at the hands of radical sects of the citizenry as opposed to an opposing military, then isn’t this an obvious law enforcement issue over military? Certainly neither DC nor Detroit, Los Angeles nor Atlanta requires the United States military to enforce the laws.

The only possibility comes in the form of corruption withing the government, and we’ve certainly heard rumblings of “death squads” and other somewhat “state-sponsored” death. But again, is that for our military? Only if we plan on storming the palace again, so to speak. And the Administration seems undeniably more interested in diplomacy than overhaul.

So we have civilian deaths at the hands of other citizens, a small handful of military deaths, and we’re working with the government rather than fighting against them. So my question is… where did the war go?