I disagree with both sides of the argument. Doubling the number of troops in the field, or smart weapons at their disposal, will not fix the problem we face in Iraq. The most common combat operation faced by our troops is a confrontation with barricaded insurgent troops. The insurgents do not wear uniforms, and mix in with civilians, which makes it next to impossible for the troops to tell good guy from bad. And the big problem is that the bad guys have no restrictions on when or who they shoot, whereas our guys have every round the fire scutinized by the media, lawyers, etc.
Adding more troops to this equation will do nothing but give the bad guys more targets to shoot at. And we can't use the smart weapons we have now because of too much risk of killing civilans. What we need is for our political and military leaders to learn that there's no such thing as a nice war. In the gold old days, aircraft, tanks, or artillery would be called in to destroy a building, with few or no casualties for our side. Now they are forced to make entry and route out the bad guys, if they can find them, and not in any way that looks bad in the eyes of the group legal officer.