Should we stay or Should we go? If we stay, how long? If we go, how soon?

If we leave immediatley, before the Iraqi government is formed and prepared to handle its own security, will the country fall into chaos and civil war? If so, would this lead to greater security threats down the road by breeding more resentment for the US?

And what about the Iraqis themselves? Would they benefit from an internal military struggle between religious and ethnic groups vying for political power? After all, a recent ABC-BBC poll indicates that 49% of Iraqis thought the invasion was good and only 38% believe the U.S. should leave now.
http://www.abcnews.go.com/images/PollingUnit/1060a1IraqWhereThingsStand.pdf

If we stay, will that not also create future security threats? After all, former head of the CIA's Counterterrorist Center Michael Scheuer made it clear in Imperial Hubris that al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups have insisted over and over again that their primary motive for attacking the United States is its presense in the Middle East.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_Hubris

And it isn't clear that our occupation of Iraq will significantly improve things. While the troop surge has helped reduce the level of violence, it seems to have failed to hasten the political process in Iraqi. Also, that same ABC-BBC poll shows that Iraqis are not thrilled about the occupation either. For example, 42% of surveyed Iraqis believed that attacks on US troops were "acceptable".
http://www.abcnews.go.com/images/PollingUnit/1060a1IraqWhereThingsStand.pdf

Which strategy best serves the interests of the United States? Which best serves the interests of the Iraqis and other Middle Eastern countries? I don't think there is a clear answer. But I would like to hear what other T-Dubbers think.

3/18/2008 7:28:18 AM

I think we need to start working with the neighboring countries to setup some sort of stable force there and drastically reduce our presence. It's clearly hurting more than it's helping. If they can't fix their own shit in a reasonable amount of time then let a dictator take over again. Some countries (Russia, China) obviously don't mind authoritarianism as much as we do.

3/18/2008 7:41:34 AM

^ Clearly hurting more than its helping? On what evidence do you base that assessment?

3/18/2008 7:48:29 AM

The creation of Al-Qeda(sp like a mofo) in Iraq would be the easiest example.

There are obviously pro-American Iraqi's, no one can dispute that, but it's also been fairly apparent over the past years that our troops simply being there are enough to make people fight.

3/18/2008 7:51:03 AM

Like fucking a girl without a condom

PULL OUT

3/18/2008 7:58:44 AM

Pull out.

Even though some people say that would lead to an increase in violence, it would actually lead to a drastic decrease.

3/18/2008 8:19:44 AM

I think there would be a short-term increase, but I think it would drop drastically after that increase.

3/18/2008 8:20:26 AM

Leave. Maybe keep some people in Baghdad to train Iraqis/guard politicians, but for the most part GTFO. Costs too much money and we are getting nothing out of it.

3/18/2008 8:23:44 AM

This war cannot be won through occupation.

The only logical step is to slowly pull our troops out while reinforcing the government that we left in place; with weapons that are better than their enemies, but not as good as ours.

Beyond that, it's a true cluster fuck that may completely destabilize the entire region.

Although the bloodletting will continue, I see no reason to have young Americans share that fate because of the poor decision-making of inept leadership.

It's time to stop digging the hole deeper.

3/18/2008 9:40:53 AM

Quote :

"I think we need to start working with the neighboring countries to setup some sort of stable force there"

Neighboring countries in that part of the world can hardly work together on their own terms, much less under an umbrella US organization. We underestimated the importance of factions when we invaded, we don't need to turn a potential civil war into a regional war with state against state.

Quote :

"It's clearly hurting more than it's helping."

Maybe not. Wisdom of the invasion and the strategy of the first few years aside, GEN Petraeus knows what he is doing. I'd argue we're (finally) helping more than we're hurting at this point.

Quote :

"our troops simply being there are enough to make people fight."

This had a lot to do with the employment of our troops. The way in which we engage the Iraqis daily has changed, and their attitude towards US troops is changing in response.


Think about it as Andy Griffith vs Barney Fife. Barney sought to impose order at all costs. At one point he locked up the entire town. No matter how much force he used, he couldn't control the town. Andy, on the other hand, never wore a gun and dealt with people by trying to understand their problems from their perspective and meet their needs in a just manner. The Rumsfeld-esque method was Barney, Petraeus is Andy. I wouldn't sell him short.

3/18/2008 10:06:17 AM

http://www.abcnews.go.com/images/PollingUnit/1060a1IraqWhereThingsStand.pdf

^ Agreed

The biggest visual indication of the populations view towards us is the amount of kids that swarm our troops, and the fact that their parents let them.

A ruff quote from the former leader of the Anbar awakening said

"In the begining both the Americans and the Iraqis were stubborn and to proud. Now the Americans and Iraqis are changing and trying to fix what happened"

It was something to that effect


[Edited on March 18, 2008 at 10:13 AM. Reason : fhfg]

3/18/2008 10:09:57 AM

^^
get your stupid barney fife bullshit out of here

besides, isn't there some women you should be busy dominating right now? [/ad hominem]



troops need to pull out immediately

and american-iraq-war-supporters need to sit back and own this whole thing as a giant mistake

any "negatives" that result from that don't matter because the mistake has already been made

if american-iraq-war-supporters somehow expect to stay and fix everything (which isn't even likely possible,)

what lesson will they have learned?

they'll have learned that "might makes right"

they'll have learned that refusing to admit one's wrongdoing is ok, as long as one tries to fix their wrongdoing

they'll have learned that it's perfectly ok to invade and occupy a sovereign nation that poses no threat

instead,

we should gtfo RIGHT NOW and american-iraq-war-supporters should learn the lesson they really need to learn

namely, YOU FUCKED UP BIG TIME. THIS IS COMPLETELY YOUR FAULT. OUR MILITARY BROKE THE LAW. YOU ARE WRONG.

american-iraq-war-supporters need to be held accountable for the entire thing

how else are they supposed to learn their lesson?

ANYONE WHO SUPPORTS THIS WAR IS WRONG. END OF STORY.

Quote :

"Even though some people say that [immediate troop withdrawal] would lead to an increase in violence, it would actually lead to a drastic decrease"

agreed, but even if that's incorrect, that's no reason for troops to stay

Quote :

"Maybe keep some people in Baghdad to train Iraqis/guard politicians"

ok perhaps, but "some" as in "less than 100" (and bush himselfshould personally foot the bill)

3/18/2008 10:12:42 AM

Um.

We have to have a stable Iraq PERIOD.

To that end General Petraeus can get us there with practical and needed troop draw downs.

It would take 2 years minimum to get everyone and all the equipment out of Iraq anyway.

[Edited on March 18, 2008 at 10:16 AM. Reason : hg]

3/18/2008 10:16:06 AM

Everyone wanting to pull out asserts that violence will drop, but provides no evidence for this assertion. I think if we knew that our being in Iraq was causing all of the conflict, the decision to leave would be easier. However, there is really no way to determine whether that is the case.

Does anyone have any arguments they can support with evidence? I realize it's hard, but that's kinda the point of the thread. This isn't an easy question.

3/18/2008 11:19:30 AM

Almost the whole of Iraq has turned against AQI and once Mosul is secure, there will be very few places they can hide from the Iraqis.

The one lingering problem is what happens when the people are left alone with the Iraqi central government. There is significant progress from the ground up local governments, but linking them with the central government to get resources and discourse remains the main concern.

The ball is in the central governments hand. The best hope for change is the political pressure the new leaders of the local governments and this huge generation of kids that are fond of American troops. Hopefully, they can provide effective leadership and, if change is needed, the people will vote that change into office.

And on a side note. There is no rational arguement for large fast troop reductions. That will never happen no matter who is in office. Any political leader will know what to do based on the excellence of Petraeus and his recommendations with correct information from the ground.

http://www.thewolfweb.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=491370

for direct information from the ground

[Edited on March 18, 2008 at 11:46 AM. Reason : das]

3/18/2008 11:45:19 AM

There's no evidence that says violence wouldn't drop either.

3/18/2008 11:45:23 AM

Quote :

"Everyone wanting to pull out asserts that violence will drop"

wow, I guess you didn't see where I said:

"agreed, but even if that's incorrect, that's no reason for troops to stay", in response to:

"[immediate troop withdrawal]....would actually lead to a drastic decrease"

iow, I want troops pull out, but I couldn't care less about whether or not violence drops

Quote :

"Does anyone have any arguments they can support with evidence?"

I do

I commented on how these iraq war supporters might learn the opposite lesson of what they should.

as for supporting evidence, how about the everyday teaching of "right and wrong" to children

if the child does something wrong, and isn't punished, they won't learn that they did anything wrong

the military (under bush) did something wrong, so if they aren't "punished", (by owning this as a mistake,)

they'll won't ever learn that they are, in fact, wrong

Quote :

"And on a side note. There is no rational arguement for large fast troop reductions."

yes there is

you war-mongering fucks need to learn your lesson: YOU WERE, ARE, AND WILL ALWAYS BE WRONG ABOUT THIS WAR

unless you pull out and "taste your medicine", you'll likely never agree that you were wrong

which you are, PERIOD. FULL STOP.


.

3/18/2008 12:21:55 PM

What you need to realize is that everyone already knows about the mistakes.

Its fixing the problem that needs to be discussed. Your arguments dont solve anything.

3/18/2008 3:28:27 PM

Quote :

"ANYONE WHO SUPPORTS THIS WAR IS WRONG. END OF STORY"

not wanting to withdraw immediately =/= supporting the war in Iraq

3/18/2008 3:31:12 PM

the illegal invaders and occupiers (US military) should not be the ones to fix the problem THEY made in the first place
(pay for it, sure, but fix it, no)

that's like saying that someone who breaks and enters a home, destroys property, kills the dog and cat

and then is like, "Oh, whoops, I made a mistake, hold on, let me fix everything, I'm not leaving until I fix everything!"

no. they need to be IMMEDIATELY removed from the home, prosecuted, jailed and forced to pay the restitution

Quote :

"not wanting to withdraw immediately == supporting the war continued illegal occupation in Iraq"

(fixed it for ya)

Quote :

"About War by John Cory Slogans -- that's war for most folks. War is Hell. Support The Troops. Uncle Sam Wants You. Yellow ribbons and candlelight vigils. War. Listen friend, war, is electric. It's a jangle of short-wired nerves; raw blue sparks that jump the gaps of politics and twist the ignition key of survival. War is living fast, hard, and furious, life between the teeth. You are never so alive as when you're about to die. War is a five-and-dime store of friction toys and cheap tin thrills. War, is all the power of heaven accessed through the front door of hell. War is a mad minute, sixty seconds of Godhood: let there be light in the rocket's red glare and the Zippo flame of razed hootches. God is an amateur who took six days to create the earth, but a grunt with a radio and artillery and air support is true holy power in a fiery obliteration of inhabitants and geography - all in less then six minutes. War is weather. Sometimes so hot, you have to chew a hole in the heat and swallow, just to get a breath of fresh air. And sweat that drips from the leaky faucet of your pores and into your eyes; sweat that scalds and blinds. So hot you could have lunch with the Devil. And there's the rain, day after day and night after night. Warm rain, muggy rain at first, slick oily droplets skidding across your skin in a muddy film that never refreshes. Then night rain, dark rain with a chilly breeze that crawls inside your fatigues and pools around your ankles and crotch, and quietly peels away the layers of your wrinkled soggy flesh. War is solitaire. Humping, marching, moving or standing watch, a soldier packs a rucksack, weapon, ammo, and thoughts. Always thoughts. The only retreat allowed in war is the retreat inside your own head. Eyes are on the terrain while radar sensors process the physical world, clicking and categorizing shapes and shadows. But the mind is crowded with another world and a cast of thousands. It's all there, living in the past and living in the future, while praying to survive the present. War is looking into a child's face, having to instantly decide whether friend or foe. Wondering what's in their smile or in their hand. Constant suspicion. Constant sadness when you see them wounded and you wonder, was it your bullet that made them an orphan or stole their limbs? War is language of the numb and damned, anesthesia to protect the soul. Call them gooks or hajis or anything but people. You don't kill people--you kill the enemy. Don't care why they are the enemy. If you care too much you will die in pieces day by day. Sweet Jesus, what the hell? Incoming! Incoming! Hit the dirt! Voices scream as the show begins. It's rock-and-roll time; psychedelic funk explodes like a bad trip on cheap acid cut with speed. The world goes slow-mo and real-time, all at once. Strangers in a strange land intent on killing one another. Don't want to die in this dirt clod of a hellhole. Dust to dust is not for me. Blip boom bang. Light 'em up! Grease the bastards! Zap the mothers, now! Medic! Medic! Exclamation points galore: with bodies strewn across the mud like so much broken furniture in the living room of violence. Turn up the volume and bring it on. Lock and load is the rhythm of surviving one more minute, one more hour, one more day. Never look down - never stop shooting - never stop. Not now. Move. Move. Move. The more you move the closer to home you get. Buddy to buddy lay the fire down and carpet the joint with anything that will kill them and preserve you. The firefight is a cacophonous rock opera gone insane: smashed guitars, squealing amps that spit fire, and drummers pounding on the audience. Sulfur smoke curls up inside your nose and passes on the stench of cauterized flesh and amputation. Youth and innocence are crumpled like discarded ticket stubs on stadium cement, but the band riots on and on. And then- It's over. The plug is pulled. Silence. Not, silence is golden, silence. Silence of the dead and doomed: cutting silence that slices tomorrow into shards of guilty relief and hope. One day down - another day to go. There are no politics in war. Politics is the luxury of the safe-at-home. War is a lottery of survival. There is no morality in war. Morality is the privilege of those judging from the distance. War is only death and destruction, regardless of which scripture is quoted. War is the tool of small-minded scoundrels who worship the death of others on the altar of their greed. War is the cemetery of futures promised. War is eternity jammed into frantic minutes that will fill a lifetime with dreams and nightmares."

[Edited on March 18, 2008 at 4:06 PM. Reason : ]

3/18/2008 3:44:06 PM

are you like the liberal version of hooksaw/treetwista/eyedrb?

3/18/2008 3:47:44 PM

Stay for 100 years or whatever McCain says.

Because my opinion is not important since he's going to be our next president.

3/18/2008 3:53:15 PM

Quote :

"you war-mongering fucks need to learn your lesson: YOU WERE, ARE, AND WILL ALWAYS BE WRONG ABOUT THIS WAR unless you pull out and "taste your medicine", you'll likely never agree that you were wrong which you are, PERIOD. FULL STOP. "

I think the concern is that the Iraqis will "taste our medicine" in the aftermath of a pull out. After we pulled out of Vietnam, more than 3 million people were killed from widescale genocide and ethnic cleansing of the Socialists looking to establish their control.

We must learn from the past and not allow the power struggle in Iraq to devolve into the atrocities seen in Southeast Asia 3 decades ago.

[Edited on March 18, 2008 at 4:15 PM. Reason : 2]

3/18/2008 4:12:28 PM

Honestly, I don't see something like that happening in this day and age without a bunch of countries stepping in. Iraq is just way too in the spotlight for the international community to allow something like that to happen.

3/18/2008 4:20:48 PM

^ Ever heard of Rwanda? Or perhaps Darfur?

3/18/2008 4:27:51 PM

Heres how we fix it.
Invest heavily in nuclear, geothermal, solar, wind, and hydro power generation. Maybe coal too.
Pull the fuck out of all of the middle east.

Without the dependence on foreign oil we would be able to safely ignore their problems. If they want to kill each other I dont really have a problem with it as long as it doesn't affect our energy costs.

In addition to being off foreign oil, new power generation methods would mean more good US jobs and lower energy costs. Lower energy costs = better economy.

3/18/2008 4:28:20 PM

I like the fucking girl analogy the most here.

3/18/2008 4:33:42 PM

i agree with mr scrumples

3/18/2008 4:54:22 PM

Quote :

"Iraq is just way too in the spotlight for the international community to allow something like that to happen."

Quote :

"Ever heard of Rwanda? Or perhaps Darfur?"

3/18/2008 10:30:41 PM

Unconditional phased withdrawal/redeployment reaching 100% within 18 months. This is not surrender. Remember, we have replaced the dictatorial regime successfully with an elected democratic government. Hoorah. Now let us move on to more important matters.

We should maintain a force of redeployed troops capable of rapid response in nearby international waters, the size of which fluctuates with conditions on the ground. This approach fails the OMF COST argument long term, as it remains a conscious incentive to deliberate on the necessity of our stay.

After all, would we be paying all this money, making all these sacrifices and enemies if we didn't feel a debt to every dead soldier we hear about to "continue doing" well...whatever the hell it is we're doing? That's a question we ought ask ourselves every day, but not at the cost of another drop of American blood unless the enemy presents a clear and present danger to our security.

In the past this was known as sound foreign policy. It's been on holiday since the gravitational constant changed on September 11th and all. Publicly respecting the rights of others to determine how to run their country tends to go a long way for the image--especially when damaged--of a nation.

Let the spooks handle ground operations from there. Break every bit of Al Qaeda in Iraq and use military intervention ONLY when we have direct evidence our sovereignty is imminently threatened OR if and when said spooks may require it for their own protection. After all, the generals tell us we've broken Al Qaeda Iraq's back.

Withdrawal would force the government to solve its internal security crisis or fail as incompetent governments--like incompetent banks that loan money to poor money managers--should. Their success or failure will show us whether the people of this nation really give a damn about the borders we've drawn for them, or if they really want to Balkanize.

Sure, we'll use all the propaganda resources at our disposal to prevent the latter, but leaflets are cheap and don't require supply lines. Better a small contingent of military intelligence spooks and special forces than a behemoth 160,000-man supply chain. At this point, I think the Iraqis ought to be free to make up their own minds at this point, but it should be at the barrel of each other's guns--y'know...like it is here--rather than those of a foreign power.

Meanwhile, we can fund Iraq's government and its efforts to reconstruct until we turn blue for all I care. We owe them restitution. The press at the Fed's certainly still warm enough to print up all the money the Iraqi government could possibly need. Recently stifled bank runs and all. ( ) Give them all the dough we can spare and let them succeed or fail on their own two feet with it.

Few can say we don't care if they fail and we cease, just that the Iraqi government fails at managing resources.

As for speculation over the future--the very crime that got us into this catastrophe--I'll do it, but frankly, my position doesn't require it:

The data says the Mahdi Army is waiting us out. If they really want their civil war, they'll have it. But frankly, we had no right to claim perfect foresight on the way in Iraq, so I don't think we have the credulity or the standing to any such claims on the way out.

Who the fuck knows what happens when our soldiers leave.

Why don't we let the Iraqis worry about figuring that part out for themselves and support whatever decision they make?

You know.

As if we gave a fuck about them.

[Edited on March 19, 2008 at 12:05 AM. Reason : more readable]

[Edited on March 19, 2008 at 12:08 AM. Reason : mad don't smile! lol]

[Edited on March 19, 2008 at 12:12 AM. Reason : and i'm spent]

3/19/2008 12:00:01 AM

Quote :

"Iraq is just way too in the spotlight for the international community to allow something like that to happen."

Quote :

"Ever heard of Rwanda? Or perhaps Darfur?"

Unless you've been locked in a closet for the past 15 years, you have heard of those places. You should realize that each country was/is 'in the spotlight', discussed at length by the UN and various governments. End result: the international community stood by and allowed 'something like that to happen'.

[Edited on March 19, 2008 at 7:07 AM. Reason : ]

3/19/2008 7:07:06 AM

5 years......

3/19/2008 9:02:33 AM

there really is no choice on what must be done in Iraq.

we have to stay until the mess if fixed and you cannot put a superficial timetable on it, at least not publically. if bad guys know they only have to wait 18 months or whatever it is to have free reign, that is what they will do. the country will be worse for it and we will be back trying to fix it no time. that is the reality of it.

there really is no point of arguing right and wrong now and it has to be acknowledged that finally, things are really improving for the the Iraqi common man. we owe it to him and all of those who gave their lives to finish, no matter what is costs or how long it takes.

3/19/2008 9:48:32 AM

392 I think we have paid for our mistakes with 4000 lives, trillions of dollars, broad public disapproval, and world wide loss of respect. I am not saying the cost of the war for us is more than the Iraqis.

-I want America out of Iraq.

-America cant totally be out of Iraq for 2 years even if you were in control.

-The Iraqis do not want America there long term, but they do realize that they need the troops until they can defend themselves. The MAIN problem with the Iraqi police is that they cannot provide logistical support for themselves. Gas, ammo, etc, this is what the troops are doing for them.

Several things has happened that you must acknowledge. Once Zarqawi(sp?) blew up that mosque and ignited that civil war, Al-queda dumped tons money and men into Iraq to maximize its effect and influence. AQI's headquarters, there base of operations, were in Al Anbar province. AQI themselves butchered the local population. One night, some young teenagers were set up as sentries for the locals and AQI members captured and killed them. That night THE LOCAL POPULATION declared jihad on AQI. Many soldiers now do not even wear body armor. It is safer there for American soldiers than in some American cities.

The Anbar awakening is the continuation of this rejection to extremism across the entire country. The importance of this to all Arabs is profound and will have lasting effects throughout history.

[Edited on March 19, 2008 at 4:58 PM. Reason : fh]

3/19/2008 4:57:48 PM

^ Not totally with you, but not far off either. What you described at the end there sounds awful close to letting them decide their fate at the barrel of each other's guns rather than at the barrel of ours.

Why couldn't we leave Iraq within 2 years?

Is there some dome over the country I haven't heard about?

^^ I see.

We can't tell them when we're leaving because then they'll just wait us out...

Not that Al Sadr's militia is doing this now or anything...

Good to know.


[Edited on March 19, 2008 at 8:15 PM. Reason : ...]

3/19/2008 8:01:39 PM

I am horrible at English

And fire lee fowler

3/19/2008 8:11:00 PM

I think BEU sums up the way I feel about the subject pretty well.

3/19/2008 11:17:45 PM

Quote :

"there really is no choice on what must be done in Iraq."

Declare victory and leave

Quote :

"we have to stay until the mess if fixed and you cannot put a superficial timetable on it, at least not publically. if bad guys know they only have to wait 18 months or whatever it is to have free reign, that is what they will do. the country will be worse for it and we will be back trying to fix it no time. that is the reality of it."

Lets stay there forever! Great idea!

Quote :

"there really is no point of arguing right and wrong now and it has to be acknowledged that finally, things are really improving for the the Iraqi common man. we owe it to him and all of those who gave their lives to finish, no matter what is costs or how long it takes."

This war going on forever will destroy America. Thank god people like you don't rule the country. Oh wait, they do.

3/19/2008 11:35:47 PM

Quote :

"Lets stay there forever! Great idea!"

Strawman! Great idea!

Tell me, if Obama gets elected and withdraws the troops, creating a power vacuum that results in millions of deaths and a more powerful Iran, are you gonna blame Bush for that as well?

My guess is yes.

3/20/2008 2:02:02 AM

^^reading interpretation is not your strong suit is it?

3/20/2008 7:18:08 AM

Quote :

"Why couldn't we leave Iraq within 2 years?"

Logistics.

3/20/2008 7:38:32 AM

I shouldn't touch this with a 10 foot pole, but...


We need to get the fuck out, now.

We've already spent more (in constant dollars) than we spent in Vietnam, 4,000 soldiers lost, been there longer than we were in WWII, etc. At some point, we need to pull the plug, and that point is fast approaching. What a massive, massive fuck up from day one. I'm probably more conservative than most on here, and was against this nation-building exercise from the beginning.


Better now under our own terms, then later.

3/20/2008 7:48:54 AM

We can't afford to be there any longer. End of discussion.

3/20/2008 8:07:10 AM

cant afford to leave immediately either. place will go to shit. that isnt right.

we need to get out ASAP, but RIGHT NOW isnt reality.

3/20/2008 8:18:18 AM

Even if we started tomorrow, it's still an 18 month process to completely pull out.

3/20/2008 8:34:41 AM

We made a catastrophic mistake because we trusted our leadership's judgement of a very dangerous situation.

Now we are at the mercy of the people who are at the mercy of us.

The decision should be simple.

We need to leave Iraq as soon as possible, because only then can we truly know the amount of damage that we have inflicted.

By staying there, we will only make the situation worse, period. We are not welcome, and staying in the region to keep the peace will only create more war.

Withdrawing slowly and protecting quickly is the only course of action that doesn't bankrupt us while at the same time doesn't slaughter them.

If this country is going to stablizie, or destablizie, it is better to know sooner than later.

There is no way to know without testing it, and there is no way to test it without leaving.

Staying in the country is not an option for Peace, it is an option for further Wars.

This is not Rome, we are not Rome, and we cannot collapse like Rome.

3/20/2008 9:51:04 AM

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/totten/2998

Quote :

"Opinion polls, including those commissioned by the American command, have long suggested that a majority of Iraqis would like American troops withdrawn, but another lesson to be drawn from Saddam Hussein’s years is that any attempt to measure opinion in Iraq is fatally skewed by intimidation. More often than not, people tell pollsters and reporters what they think is safe, not necessarily what they believe. My own experience, invariably, was that Iraqis I met who felt secure enough to speak with candor had an overwhelming desire to see American troops remain long enough to restore stability."

It might well be possible, that by the time a new president is elected, the situation on the ground will be just the right time to leave. I mean its not even close to a war anymore, its a low grade insurgency with the populace alligned with us.

And I am sure the dems will take all the credit for pulling out and all.

God praise Petraeus.


[Edited on March 20, 2008 at 10:06 AM. Reason : g]

3/20/2008 9:58:50 AM

http://www.newsweek.com/id/62980

good article from just before the invasion.

Quote :

"Members of the Bush administration talk as if war in Iraq will open the way to peace and harmony in the never-peaceful, never-harmonious Middle East; help revitalize the world economy with cheaper oil, and strike a powerful blow against terrorism. But few policymakers close to the action expect those results. None doubt that the United States will win the war, but they anticipate an absolutely murderous aftermath. "We are really scared of a new wave of terror," blurts out one senior official in France. "The consequences will not be immediate," predicts an Arab ambassador at the U.N. "You might see GIs distributing chocolates in the streets of Baghdad and being embraced--for three months. And then the opposition to the new colonial power will emerge, and to any other clients being imposed as Iraqi leaders." "

Quote :

"Does all this potential chaos mean the United States should give up, turn away, and ignore the theoretical dangers that Iraq may pose? Certainly not. But seasoned Europeans are wondering: why the rush? "Why aren't we concentrating our forces on terrorism?" asks one senior official in Paris. And at the very least, the American public has to be prepared for the dangers that this war may pose. But the Game Boy-like presentation of dozens of U.S. military operations over the past 20 years--lights, gun-cameras, action--hasn't given Americans much sense of the grim realities in store."

Quote :

"There should be no illusions that the reconstruction of Iraq will be anything but difficult, confusing, and dangerous for everyone involved," says a recent working paper from the Council on Foreign Relations in New York and the James A. Baker Institute at Rice University. "If Washington does not clearly define its goals for Iraq and build support for them domestically and with its allies and partners," the report predicts in its very first paragraph, "the United States may lose the peace, even if it wins the war.""

While it wasn't entirely accurate in all of its predictions, it clearly outlines the negative results that most analysts and leaders both home and abroad said would happen....and for the most part, did. All this was basically ignored by the bush admin. while they were touting how easy the battle would be, and using selective information to build a false case for the invasion.

after a blunder of this magnitude (not to mention the lies to set it up), I find it hard to have faith in anything bush wants to do...including "staying the course".

3/20/2008 10:21:20 AM

The costs we have incurred during the invasion and occupation of Iraq are sunk. If we leave now, we will not get back the troops or the money we have lost. The only relevant question now is whether the net benefits of leaving "immediatley" (gradual redeployment over next 2 years) against the net benefits of delaying withdrawal.

Most of the people in this thread have done a good job of describing the the gross benefit of leaving Iraq--that we will not have to pay for the occupation anymore. However, there will also be costs that many fewer people have considered. For example, there is a risk that leaving Iraq could result in civil war over political control between the relgious factions. This is a cost not only for the Iraqis that would be killed during the conflict, but also potentially for the U.S., who will be rightly blamed for the chaos.

Few people have also considered the benefits of the U.S. staying, particuarly for the Iraqis. As recent polls indicate, the vast majority of Iraqi (62%) don't want the U.S. to leave right now. Large portions of the population have also found their lives and local security improved now that we have expanded our troop presense.

If you are not considering all sides of the equation, you are going to get the wrong solution.

3/20/2008 11:18:22 AM

I am simply saying Bush and his logic can't be trusted, as it has been proven over and over....you just don't know his motives.

I agree the past costs are sunk, but it doesn't seem like the Iraqi gov is serious about taking control...and you can't blame them as long as the US is comitted to being there indefinitely, why not let us burdent the bulk of the responsibility and the cost if we're willing to?

I'm not even saying we should immediately withdraw, only that there should be some sort of plan where there is currently none, and no prospects on the horizion (other than "staying the course" which is just as bad as no plan at all imo.)

3/20/2008 11:57:14 AM