I would answer no to Mathieu, and no to your fictitious American straight-talker.
Algeria was a huge drag on the French economy. I seem to recall reading that they spent 9 francs on the place for every franc they got out of it. Their economy didn't recover from WWII until the mid-60s, largely because De Gaulle pulled them out of that blood-and-money-pit. Iraq's the same thing for us, only there aren't 1.2 million Americans living in Iraq so our departure should be noticeably less politically painful. Pretty sure no one's going to try to assassinate the President just for pulling us out of there.
But you're right, if a nation does want to maintain a useless, expensive empire, they have to be prepared to accept torture and murder. Just look at China's occupation of Tibet, among many other examples.
Not really analogous politically, there arent 1.2m US citizens born and living in Iraq who've never seen the States, Iraq is not a US state like Algeria was part of metropolitan France. On a moral or military question there is an allegory plus the Algerian war was a watershed in European-Arab relations and in Arab nationalism.
Nice post by critterdom, except he somehow forgot to mention the way the oppression of Algeria and Iraq affected the Algerian and Iraqi people. It's typical of "anti-war" Western liberals to talk about how costly imperialism is for the imperialists, but it's rare to see them defend the victims of imperialism on any moral grounds. In reality they aren't that much better than the hawks.
How about asking the Algerian and Iraqi people about it? Oh but wait, they're just brown-skinned Muslims, what do their opinions count. My God, people like you really make me want to puke. It's astounding that we still have filth like you in today's world.