Pennsylvania Congressman John P. Murtha's call for withdrawing America's troops from Iraq brought predictable responses from both sides of the political aisle, with Democrats backing the congressman's position and the Bush administration and Republican members of Congress speaking out against that stance.

But amid the back-and-forth over this new intensity in the Iraq debate is the grim fact that America's military effort in that nation has continued over the past year or so to produce no big successes against the insurgency signaling that the end of U.S. involvement might be in sight.

But at the same time, the U.S. military death toll has continued to grow — now over 2,000 — with thousands more having come home with serious wounds that will severely impact the rest of their lives.

Also, the Iraq war effort has consumed more than $200 billion that many Americans, including some members of Congress, believe could have been better spent.

Iraq is a growing problem for the Bush administration, regardless of how the president and his supporters continue to tout successes in establishing a new government and repairing the nation's infrastructure — and how much the administration believes the mission is necessary to protect America's freedom.

There is a belief in this country that a nation with so many capabilities — military, intelligence and otherwise — should not be so bogged down and, essentially, marking time while this country's troops are increasingly the target of an enemy insurgency.

That is not an unpatriotic viewpoint; it is a legitimate topic for nonpartisan debate.

To hear Murtha proclaim that it is time to bring America's troops home is not a call to be ignored — and the debate since the congressman's news conference Thursday shows how seriously others in Congress and the Bush administration are regarding it.

While people like House Speaker Dennis Hastert are content to deflect the nuts-and-bolts debate on Iraq with statements such us "they want us to retreat; they want us to wave the white flag of surrender to the terrorists of the world," the important issue remains whether the American military already has accomplished its mission and whether Iraqis should be fully handed the task of determining Iraq's future.

Murtha, who three years ago voted for the war and remains one of Congress' most knowledgeable lawmakers on defense and national security, believes the mission indeed has been accomplished and that U.S. troops have become just a catalyst for continuing Iraq violence.

George W. Bush has never proven that that is not in fact the truth but has correctly outlined risks associated with announcing a withdrawal date.

Withdrawal date or not, it would seem some good news of important consequence is needed in short order, if only to turn around the plummeting public support for the war effort.

The current image of America marking time is feeding the goals of the insurgency. Perhaps Murtha's stance will at least help eventually to end some of that perception, even if his immediate goal is not forthcoming.

Murtha, a Vietnam War veteran who has served 31 years in Congress, believes all U.S. troops could be pulled out within six months. He introduced a resolution Thursday that would force the president to call back the military.

While it's unlikely that the GOP-controlled Congress will allow that resolution to come to the floor for a vote, Murtha, without a doubt, raised the Iraq debate more than a notch and has caught the attention of millions of his countrymen.

The issue isn't now so much whether the United States attacked Iraq based on flawed intelligence about weapons of mass destruction and prematurely proclaimed "mission accomplished," it is whether this country is now doing more damage to itself and Iraqis by having America's troops remain there.

The nation needs to reflect seriously on Murtha's words, including on whether the administration really knows where it is going in regard to Iraq.

If it does, it needs to address the growing national concern in a way that will restore the people's confidence.