>>Opinions and motives yes - as in "this coming from the guy who once said < quote here >", not as "this coming for the guy who wants America to lose".
>>
>>I.e. what's fair, IMO, is to remind the reader of the critic of something that the criticised author actually said or did, not to just slap a label or a perceived intent. This "they want America to lose" is highly debatable, and prone to interpretation (as the one I saw elswhere in this thread - "they want withdrawal, but if we withdraw we think it means we lost, therefore they want us to lose" - very stretched), and using that as a means of dismissing the opponent's claims is not painting you as fair at all.
>
>If the US pulls out immediately, the US loses. Do we at least agree here?

We obviously don't. American troops aren't conquered in any battle. Mission, OTOH, is as accomplished as it was three years ago.

If an army loses (what?), it's from an opposing army. I don't see any such army out there.

If there was anything to be won or lost there, it's already lost, and gets more lost by day - lives, healths, money, respect, goodwill.

>If the US pulls out immediately, Iraq loses. I believe this is true as well but I can understand disagreement.
>
>Based on this if you want an immediate pullout, you want America to lose. It may not be your first reason, but it is an effect that cannot be ignored.

Obviously, it is so only in your definition of "lose". On the other hand, a pullout would mean:
- America trusting the democracy it created to be able to stand on its own
- America being strong and bold enough to know when to stop doing something that doesn't work, turn the page and change the approach
- America taking out the main reason for existence of most of the battling factions there, its own presence. Lacking that, they'd have a much harder time recruiting new mujahedeens
- America showing the world that its army is not Halliburton's security service
- America showing the world that its goal wasn't to have permanent bases near the oil wells

The net gain would be the recovery of the image of the US abroad, increased respect, rebuilding ties with disappointed former allies, and should I mention the cessation of deaths of the young people in uniforms? Also, let's not forget the hemorrhaging of our tax money.

>I don't think its stretched at all, but I admit my perception of the status of the war is vastly different than those I'm debating. I am very optimistic right now about the progress being made. I believe that Iraq has turned a corner and is heading towards a stable democracy. I also believe that an immediate pullout of the troops would be disasterous. From this point of view I believe that anyone who want to pull out now is actively encouraging the insurgency and seeking the defeat of the US.

See my third point above. With occupying forces gone, the insurgency makes no sense anymore, and is exposed to the people as grab for power it is. They completely lose any aura of freedom fighters they may have claimed, and lose any popular support they may have had.