The basis of your post is that we must keep fighting in Iraq until we achieve "total victory" but this debate is meaningless unless you define exactly what you mean by this.
Your interpretation of victory, and it's consequences, may be different from that of others and appears to me to be the nexus of disagreement.
I have been a supporter of this engagement since the beginning but I now do not believe we can achieve the "victory" that was intended at the start. That doesn't mean the effort was for naught nor does it mean we should disengage at this point. But we do need to have a clear idea of what we desire to achieve, if it is attainable and what unintended consequences may develop.
Complete victory is the destruction of AL Qaeda in Iraq and hence its destruction around the world. It is the destruction of Iran and Syria terrorists in Iraq and hence a huge fatal blow for both the Iranian and Syrian terrorist regime. When terrorism is defeatist in Iraq it will be defeated everywhere else. That is the complete victory.