> If there is no likelihood of combat, foreign soldiers are not
> necessary in Iraq. After all, the job of soldiers is to combat.
Not really. The most effective and professional armies (1) avoid/prevent conflict wherever possible, and (2) deal with threats when they emerge. That is to say, things would probably be quite different in Iraq had two events not occurred in April 2003: US forces' massacre of demonstrators in Fallujah, and their failure to arrest Muqtada el Sadr in relation to the killing of Abd al-Majid Khoi.
> If there is any likelihood of combat at all, foreign soldiers unprepared
> to fight are useless:
There is a big difference between soldiers who are unprepared to fight and soldiers who have been ordered not to fight by their governments.
> >And if such a handover were to occur
>
> Will never happen.
Probably not. Neither will the withdrawal of US forces, until some kind of empire-friendly government of Iraqis appears to have been successfully installed.
regards,
Grant.