The troop Surge is a viable solution to the situation in Iraq.

Yes, I agree with you that Iraq does need our aid. However, needing our aid is different from relying on it. You state that military action takes precedence over political action, however you failed to address that a lack of political action is what makes military action necessary. The mainly Shiite Iraqi government has not reached out sufficiently to the Sunni's, hence the Sunni's feel that they are unrepresented in the "democratic government." There have not been peace talks even occurring in Iraq, simply police forces to stop the violence. Like I mentioned, the violence stems from centuries of tension, and therefore temporarily stopping it is not going to be good for Iraq in the long run. You stated that Military solutions are the only solution and that a democratic government cannot function under violence. However, one of the key aspects of democracy is that arguments are resolved in a peaceful way, with words such as we're doing now, instead of fighting. The Iraqi government has not approached this situation with the political solution at all, and a political solution would achieve peace with much less bloodshed and also be morally correct. You say that the IM is on its way to achieving its own goals. However, there are numerous reports that militia infiltration has caused fighting AMONG the IM. Also, about a third of the Iraqi army, 50000 troops are on leave at any given time. Prime Minister Nouri Maliki has focused attacks on SUNNI MILITIAS, and ignoring the Shiite Militias within the region. This is all according to: http://www.americanprogress.org.... Now, we see that the current Iraqi government and IM will not be ready to achieve their own goals. They are simply too divided and biased in order to run a democratic government by themselves. Therefore the troop surge, which was designed to give the Iraqis more time to get things straight, has actually not achieved that purpose for the logistical problems continue in the IM and Iraqi Governments. This is clearly not the road to a viable solution, and again, I stated before that it actually isn't morally the right path to take. You stated that the Iraqi government is weak and not in control, however not only is this a contradiction to your statement that the Iraqi government is in control of the IM, but in a democratic nation, all "power" comes from the people. Therefore problems amongst the people should be resolved first and once these are, stability will be brought to the region. The Iraqi government has come to rely on the US military and isn't doing their part to ensure political stability, which can be easily obtained if bias is overcome and negotiations are pursued. In summary: 1)The Iraqi government has not approached the violence with from a political standpoint. 2)In fact, they have demonstrated extreme bias in the Sunni-Shiite conflict which is detrimental to achieving peace. 3)A political solution would be more morally correct than a military solution. 4)A political solution would resolve in fewer casualties. 5)A political problem results in violence; therefore, to solve the problem, a political solution would be better. 6)These political problems have not been targeted by the Iraqi government, and they have come to rely on US troop prescense. 7)The Iraqi Military is still having the problems it has before the troop surge, and these problems are likely to continue. therefore it can be seen that a political solution would be far more viable and sustainable than the US troop surge. A political solution would also get US Troops out of the region faster than waiting for the IM to get its act together. I reiterate that these political solutions HAVE NOT been properly pursued. Therefore, please Vote in Negation.