A year after his State of the Union address outlining U.S. strategy for Iraq, President Bush takes the podium to outline his plan for the coming year. Most Americans are eager to know - regardless of how and why we are in Iraq - how we will extricate ourselves from an increasingly costly and complicated situation with no easy out. Many analysts from both right and left urge that the President fundamentally re-think his national security strategy. One thing's for certain: the U.S. can't just cut and run. So what do we hope to achieve in Iraq and Afghanistan?

• As we become increasingly entrenched in Iraq, conservatives and liberals alike advise sharing the burden with the UN and the international community. But what price are we willing to pay for their help?
  
  
• Analysts say successful reconstruction will require a costly, long-term commitment. With deficits soaring and basic services slashed, our own financial future is in question. What should be our highest priority? Can we afford to "save" Afghanistan, Iraq - and ourselves?

The invasion of Iraq ended an oppressive regime but also placed the U.S. in the awkward and burdensome role of rebuilding a broken and bankrupt nation. U.S. forces face a bitter war of attrition in a country whose citizens increasingly see us as oppressors rather than liberators. In an often forgotten Afghanistan, we cling to fragile threads of peace amid growing threats of civil war.

Facing this reality, critics of the war and occupation are emerging from surprising sources -- the Army War College, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill, and former intelligence officers. All question the rationale for war, pre-war intelligence and postwar planning.

Nation-building experts say three elements are essential to success -- substantial effort, major financial investment and long-term commitment. To achieve success in Bosnia, we spent $1,390 per person per year. In Afghanistan today, we're spending $52. Can we buy success on the cheap? Can we afford to pay more?

What is the war doing to the readiness and morale of U.S. armed forces? As casualties rise, re-enlistment falls. Top brass complain that we're overstretched and under-equipped for the commitments we've made. "Stop-loss" orders are forcing soldiers to remain deployed long past their tours of duty, inflicting severe strain on families and their finances. Do declining re-enlistment and low recruitment rates indicate a military stretched too thin? Is a military draft on the way?

Has the conquest of Afghanistan and Iraq made us safer? Is Afghanistan free of the Taliban and terrorists? Where is Osama Bin Laden? And whatever happened to the global "war on terror"? As deficits and daily death counts climb, do we dare ignore the ultimate question: What is our exit strategy?