Couple thoughts. I think most can agree at this point that the main focus of the U.S. military needs to be on fighting Islamic extremism and terrorism. Some will disagree as to whether the most effective of way of doing that is to be in Iraq right now. Many on the left say they opt for redeployment. But think about that. that doesn't really jive "we want to bring the troops home." I mean redeployment, is redeplyment. Many of them may not be comeing home, they just wouldn't be in Iraq. I'm all for redeployment of the dems mean it. However I'm not sure they really mean that. My guess is they just want to get the troops home and keep them here and 'redeploy' is the word their using for that so it sounds as though they have a more efficient plan in mind. So what is the best move? Many who call themselves members of the right say to redeploy troops is surrender. Personally I don't see how that can be the case. there isn't anything to surrender. So let's say we redeploy and I guess what I would mean by that is that we use our forces in teh most effective way possible to combat terrorists. What would that look like? Here's a crazier thought; maybe redeployment would/should still constitute a very large contingent of our troops remaining in Iraq. We can still tell the Iraqi government that their time is up and that we will no longer be directly militarily involved. At the same time the Middle East is the heart of Islamic extremism and it isn't a bad idea to have a base of operations there. And since we already basically have one in Iraq we may as well just stay there dont' you think?