The Economist : Why America Should Stay.

As we posted a couple days ago, The Economist has taken a strong stance against the US pullout of Iraq. Their point is essentially that a precipitate withdrawal would do more harm than good as long as the Iraqi forces are not ready to take over and that it would embolden Zarkawi and his fanatics who have been killing more Iraqis than Foreign troops.
It seems to me that the main danger would consists in giving way to the terrorists and turn Iraq into a training field à la Afghanistan during the Taliban regime. On the other hand, it is true that some of the insurgents are fighting because of the presence of American troops. What percentage exactly? Well, it's not like we have polls on that!
The mainquestion may not be so much the"when" as the "how" to withdraw troops. The US has a responsibility to ensure that as they stand down, the Iraqi forces are standing up, like connected vessels working together.

Two things The Economist says that I definitely agree on :

1) If the Iraqi government formally ask the troops to leave, they should do so.

2) The argument about whether the US should quit Iraq is not the same as the one about whether they should have gone there in the first place. (and unfortunately this often confused in the many discussions).