On this fifth anniversary of the American-led Western attack on Iraq, the struggle between the army of occupation and Iraqi guerilla fighters has reached stalemate. Despite the superficial success the Iraqi militias - Sunni or Shia - have not been finally crushed, but remain in being. The Iraqi militias and Al Qaeda terrorists for their part have been giving tough fight to the occupying troops round Basra, where the 4,500 British troops are now confined to a self-imposed internment on the airbase, leaving the city in the hands of local militias. But the situation didn"t stop President Bush from claiming what he described as a "noble" war had been an "undeniable" success. In a remarkable boast that even took Middle East experts by surprise, he said the world was witnessing "the first large-scale Arab uprising against Osama Bin Laden" in Iraq.
If President Bush believes that, then he is in a very small minority.
Even supporters of the war and occupation such as John McCain accept that an early withdrawal of Western forces would plunge Iraq into chaos, as rival militias, Sunni and Shia, fought for power.
The Western forces are, therefore, stuck in the country without hope of early escape - hardly what Bush and Blair expected five years ago.
The so- called Iraqi "government" in Baghdad enjoys little authority outside the Green Zone, while the vaunted democratically-elected Parliament is a useless squabbleshop for rival Sunni, Shia and Kurdish politicians.
Real governance belongs to tribal and militia leaders.
The American military now base their counter-insurgency policy on deals with such local leaders, even paying former enemies to act as agents of law and order. What a farce!
Five years on, it is beyond question that Bush and Blair committed a catastrophic error of judgment in deciding to attack Saddam Hussein"s Iraq.
Not merely catastrophic but positively criminal because we now know for certain that American, British and world opinion was being systematically lied to about the alleged threat from Saddam.
What's more, to launch the war without authorisation by a fresh and specific UN Security Council resolution was a blatant breach of international law.
And five years on, we can count the cost in blood and treasure of Bush and Blair"s criminal folly.
According to the Congressional Budget Office in Washington, the double cost of the occupation of Iraq, plus the even longer occupation of Afghanistan, already amounts to more than $800billion - far more than the bill for the entire Vietnam War.
The military cost to Britain of the Iraq adventure alone in the years 2002-3 to 2006-7 came to nearly £5billion.
What about the human cost of "Operation Iraqi Freedom"? Estimates vary, but between 150,000 and 600,000 Iraqi men, women, and children have died.
They have been the victims of disease and infant mortality brought on by the destruction of Iraq"s water and sewage system (still not repaired); and, for that matter, also victims of the destruction of what under Saddam had been the best health service in the Arab Middle East.
It is no wonder that four million Iraqis have become refugees, either inside Iraq itself or in countries such as Jordan and Syria.
The foreign occupiers have also paid heavily in blood.
The total of American servicemen and women killed in action is approaching 4,000, plus some 20,000 wounded.
The very much smaller British forces have seen 175 of their troops killed, and nearly 1,400 personnel have been wounded badly enough to be evacuated from theatre.
Yet there have been other grim consequences for the West, since the invasion of Iraq - consequences brought about by the sheer ruthlessness of America"s conduct of the so-called "War on Terror".
We can remember the appalling scenes of fire and devastation during the "total war" bombing of Baghdad exactly five years ago tonight.
We can remember the destruction wrought on civilian homes in Iraq and their inhabitants ever since then by American counter-insurgency operations, as in the 2004 battle of Fallujah.  And not forgetting the illegal Guantanamo Bay concentration camp, where prisoners have been held for years without charge or trial, or the practice of "extraordinary rendition", the kidnapping of suspected terrorists in one country for interrogation under torture in another.
Only this month President Bush has endorsed the practice of interrogation by "waterboarding", or simulated drowning.
So, who can wonder that there has been a floodtide of anger among Muslims everywhere against America and its allies?
We now know beyond doubt that this Muslim rage at American ruthlessness has served to fuel the global Islamist jihadi movement - especially among young Muslims living in the West.
Five years on, we can, therefore, accurately measure the scale and scope of the catastrophe wrought by Bush and Blair.
This makes it all the more vital that we avoid a future repetition in some other unfortunate non-Western country.
Such avoidance requires first of all that we understand the basic convictions that motivated Bush and Blair.
Both men are religious fanatics seeing international relations as a struggle between Good and Evil, rather than the pragmatic fixing of business between nation states.
And both men bought the grandiose theorising of glib but influential academics.
These neo-cons promoted a vision of the United States converting the whole world to American-style democracy, thanks to the leverage of her unrivalled military power. And Iraq was to provide the initial bridgehead, but it has resulted in a failed state and hence a big failure for Bush & Blair
In Britain, the equivalent visionaries peddled the concept of "liberal interventionism", whereby it was no longer necessary to respect the sovereignty of the nation state, as enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations and as acknowledged in international relations for 400 years.
Instead, these visionaries preached that it was legitimate, even a moral duty, for liberal democracies to intervene in other states if their regimes were tyrannies oppressing their own people.
So, what is the final lesson for the West five years after the attack on Iraq?
It is quite simple, mind your own business