My view on foreign policy is always dictated by the principles of real politique.
Considering the issue of Iraq (and the US military presence there and the ongoing insurrection against same) I've come to the conclusion that an American withdrawl is necessary. My reasons are as follows.
1. The situation in Iraq is dangerously unstable. This instability appears to be primarily caused by an ongoing insurrection against the American military occupation of Iraq. That is to say, the US occupation (or the US removal of Sadam) is the 'cause' of the problem (same difference).
2. The continued instability of Iraq poses a great danger of spilling over its borders, or drawing in neighboring countries, to a larger regional war with religious overtones. This is the worst possible (realistic) scenario.
3. The continued instability of Iraq poses a great danger of recruiting, training and equipping a whole new generation of anti-American fanatics. The lastest NIE confirms this is already happening.
4. The US military has, categorically and repeatedly, failed to control the situation in Iraq. The amount, sophistication and severity of attacks in Iraq have consistently and constantly increased over time. One can only describe the US military-political control situation in Iraq as 'deteriorating' - consistently and constantly now for at least 2.5 years at the minimum.
5. The American-sponsored Iraqi government has proven itself incapable of even a minimum level of competance or function.
On this basis, the only possible near-term resolution to this problem must be a US military withdrawl from Iraq. At the very least, this would remove the single largest reason that symbolically allows Sunni, Shi'ite and various foreign Islamic fanatical factions to share common cause in Iraq. Removing American forces, removes their unity of purpose.
A full withdrawl of American military forces from Iraq is said to be impossible because it would turn Iraq into chaos. I respectfully submit that Iraq is already chaotic as a failed state, with an insurrection against a foreign occupying army and a religious-civil war all going on similtaneously. There is little scope for it to actually get worse - it is already a festering mess.
And that is the ultimate reason the US needs to withdraw. As it stands, with the US occupying Iraq, there is no possible 'realistic' resolution to the present quagmire. As long as US remains occupying Iraq, it will remain a quagmire. It is only when one removes the US military occupation of Iraq from the picture that one is able to actually see potential resolutions taking shape in Iraq.
Ergo, as long as US stays, Iraq today is as good as it is going to get and will never be anything but what it is now (with lots of scope for actually getting worse). If the US pulls out, then resolution becomes possible (not guarenteed or even likely, but at least possible).
As for the timing of a pullout - fast or slow - that is of little concern. The US military cannot pull out quickly even if it was ordered to do so. It would take them at least six months to do it if you ordered it immediately. And the US military-industrial-political complex is way too heavily invested in the Iraq operation so they will fight tooth and nail against ANY withdrawl no matter what.
Indeed, without a method of 'face-saving' for the US here, I don't see how it is possible. US high-level politicans have proven (now as well as back in Vietnam) that they will leave the army out to die if it means them saving
face or salving their egos. So any withdrawl from Iraq MUST have a method of US saving-face - otherwise, it ain't gonna happen (no matter how necessary to US long term security it is). This applies even after the present occupant of the WH is thankfully ejected in January 2009.
And I can pretty much guarentee that the US will still have some 150,000 troops in Iraq come November 2008 - no matter what.