Here at the Agonist a long running argument has been about whether or not a pullout of US troops would lead to even worse violence than exists now. My argument has been that while there might be a spike in violence, the Coalition pulling out is the prerequisite to fixing Iraq's violence issues (and, for that matter, pretty much any of Iraq's problems.)

The data points continue to pile up that when the US or Britain leaves an area violence actually decreases:

The British army says violence in Basra has fallen by 90% since it withdrew from the southern Iraqi city earlier this year. Around 500 British soldiers left one of Saddam Hussein's palaces in the heart of the city in early September and stopped conducting regular foot patrols. A spokesman says the Iraqi security forces still come under attack from militants in Basra, but the overall level of violence is down 90% since the British troops left. Britain is scheduled to return control of Basra province to Iraqi officials next month, officially ending Britain's combat role in Iraq.

Occupying a country, if you don't do it properly, increases rather than decreases violence. A majority of Iraqis want the US out. Perhaps they have a good reason for that. Foreign occupation troops aren't the solution to Iraqs problems. Nor is occupying Iraq any longer a solution to any problem the US has. It's time to leave. Let the Iraqis deal with the aftermath. The "pottery barn" rule doesn't apply when the owners and employees are all begging you to "just leave the shop, sir. We'll pick up the pieces. No, no, you don't own anything. Please, just leave the store. Please, oh arghhh! You broke something else. And something else! No! No! Just leave. Leave!!!"

That's the situation.

Time for the US to just leave.

(A prior post on the violence/coaltion troop issue.)