We are continually told that we must stay in Iraq to prevent a sectarian blood bath. But the Iraqi people don't seem to share this fear, and perhaps with good reason. A study of violent attacks in Iraq indicates that the sectarian violence has largely subsided, and that most of the remaining violence is directed at the occupation, and at government officials who are perceived to be collaborating with US. forces. http://www.countercurrents.org/lin190308.htm

This would seem to indicate that violence in Iraq could dwindle away to nothing, if only we would leave.

Of course, no one can guarantee what will happen in Iraq if U.S. forces depart. But the same is true for the opposite position. It's possible that the violence will continue precisely because the occupation continues.
It's time to cut through the pointless, circular debate. It's time to ask the Iraqi people what they want, NOT what U.S. politicians want. The Iraqi people should decide. That's democracy, isn't it?

Yes, that is democracy. The locals get to decide and not the foreigners.

All the shades of Muslims can agree on one thing and this "America Out". Even in Gulg1 when thee's little doubt as to the good intentions of American forces, Saudi Arabia didn't want US troops there for any duration. One of the 'justifications' for al Qaeda is the presence of the infidel troops on sacred Muslim soil.

Short of a war situation there is no circumstance that the maintaining of troops in Iraq makes any sense except to a warmonger seeking trouble. None. Except to protect the imposed oil barons.

{Excuse my impatience in not rechecking my post before saving. This should read ...}

Yes, that is democracy. The locals get to decide and not the foreigners.

All the shades of Muslims can agree on one thing and this is "America Out". Even in Gulf 1 when there was little doubt as to the good intentions of American forces, Saudi Arabia didn't want US troops there for any duration. One of the 'justifications' of al Qaeda for their 'war' is the presence then of the infidel troops on sacred Muslim soil.

Short of a war situation there is no circumstance that the maintaining of troops in Iraq makes any sense except to a warmonger seeking trouble. None. Except to protect the imposed oil barons.

Sectarian violence achieved it's goal. The Shiites now control Baghdad, the Kurds control the North (although Mosul is the current battlefield) and the Sunny are ensconced in the West.

The simple truth about the American presence in Iraq is that it has become irrelevant.

Whatever happened during the Surge had nothing to do with the Surge. Just a mere nexus in time.