Far better to have declared that the "war" is over, but that the mission continues, and that that mission will indeed include combat operations.

We do not want to define our endstate as total peace with no combat going on, or we could be there another 10 years. Rather at that point where we have raised Iraqi capacity and reduced the threat to the point where they meet. Where our capacity is no longer required and we can step aside.

Granted, even then there may be some areas or certain periods where threats surge beyond Iraqi capacity, but that by an large they have it and there mission continues as well.

I think we cling to terms like "war" and "combat" in the military because our guys are out there doing hard, dangerous work and we want to get full credit. At some point you just have to be a quiet professional and realize not everyone is going to understand what you do, why you do it, or how dangerous it actually is. You just do it because its your mission and you understand that strategically its better not to oversell these things. It's only an IO seam if you make it one.

I hate to think about how many soldiers were killed in WWII doing "mop-up" operations after MacArthur had declared a place "secured."