World English Dictionary defines “spin” thusly:

13.informal to present news or information in a way that creates a favourable impression

President Obama is kind enough to provide us with an example:

President Obama on Monday announced plans to withdraw combat forces in Iraq, providing assurances that an Aug. 31 deadline will be met as the U.S. moves toward a supporting role in the still-fractured and dangerous nation.

U.S. forces in Iraq will number 50,000 by the end of the month — a reduction of 94,000 troops since he took office 18 months ago, the president said in remarks to the Disabled American Veterans. The remaining troops will form a transitional force until a final withdrawal from the country is completed by the end of 2011, he said.

… “Make no mistake, our commitment in Iraq is changing — from a military effort led by our troops to a civilian effort led by our diplomats.”

Only in the world of “spin”  (or Orwell) would 50,000 troops be considered a “civilian effort led by our diplomats”.  Oh, but they’re not “combat” troops, they are “transitional” troops. I wonder what that means? Let’s see what CNN has to say:

Administration officials, who briefed reporters on the plan, said the remaining troops would take on advisory roles in training and equipping Iraqi forces, supporting civilian operations in Iraq and conducting targeted counterterrorism missions, which would include some combat.

OK, so “transitional” troops can still do combat, but we’re not going to call them “combat” troops anymore.  Gotcha, spinmeister!  Oh, and lets see if you can find the spin sentence here:

“We sent our troops to Iraq to do away with Saddam Hussein’s regime and you got the job done,” he said, referring to the troops.

The U.S. military had also “exceeded every expectation” suppressing the insurgency in the years that followed.

That was a trick question, there’s more than one part that’s spin there.  First, we did not send our troops to get rid of Saddam Hussein, we sent them to find the weapons of mass destruction.   And because Hussein was harboring Al-Qaeda.  And because of Iraq’s support of Palestinian suicide bombers.  And because of Iraqi human rights abuses.  And finally, we sent our troops in an effort to spread democracy to the country.  At least, those are the reasons that were variously offered at the time of the invasion, according to Wikipedia.   Of course, it becomes harder to discuss Hussein’s human right’s abuses when there were similarly inhumane abuses following the U.S. occupation, just as it’s problematic to claim that you are spreading democracy in a country that appears to have a vibrant, armed resistance to such democracy.  “You’ll get your democracy, like it or not, Iraqis!”

Secondly, show me any person that thinks that the U.S. military “exceeded every expectation” in suppressing the insurgency.   I seem to remember some talk of the situation devolving into a  civil war, and I think the word “quagmire” might have even been bandied about.  But, that’s spin for you.

If you want to see what it looks like when troops really, truly withdraw from a fight, the Dutch are doing just that in Afghanistan.  After the Netherlands’ coalition government collapsed in February over the war in Afghanistan, they are pulling out.

Dutch command was formally handed over to the US and Australia in a small ceremony on Sunday at the main military base in Uruzgan – where most Dutch soldiers have been deployed.

The Dutch ministry of defence told the BBC that while its military mission in Afghanistan had ended, a redeployment task force would stay on to oversee the return of vehicles, military hardware and equipment to the Netherlands.

See how they can pull out without leaving any “transitional” forces (who may also engage in combat)?  All they need is the people to pack up all the stuff and ship it home.  Perhaps we should be learning from them.