Questioning Infinity

http://mobile.nytimes.com/article?a=213767&f=28

O Hanlon, Biddle, and Pollack have an important oped today laying out the case for the continued presence in Iraq that we will be hearing over the next few months.

A few questions for the authors:

You offer up the situation in Anbar as a model for how to 'responsibly' draw down troop levels. Given that occurred in less than 12 months how can you outright rule out that conditions might be acceptable to even start a withdrawl 24 months from now? And what are the implications to your hypothesis of the fact that violence decreased in that region during every month when the US troop presence decreased?

What do you think are the implications of the fact that the key to public popularity for Iraqi politicians is a loud opposition to the US presence? If our presence is vital to stability, and most Iraqis justy want stability, is it a case that Iraqi's do not generally express their true opinion when asked about whether US troops make the situation better or that they do not understand/recognize the benefits of our troops?

You annecdotally mention that while their has been a great deal of forced ethnic migration the past two years Sunnis are now fearful of other Sunnis tribes encrouching on their property. If we could get the tribes to reach a settlement but then people began to say they were afraid of their neighbors taking their property, is that grounds to stay longer?

Using quantitative metrics, what are the minimum characteristics of 'success' that would allow for a 'responsible' withdrawl?