what is the current plan in Iraq?

Question

all right I understand we went in there to get Sadaam out. mission accomplished. then the plan shifted to set up iraq's own security force. mission accomplished. now they say we're there to mediate between a civil war. is that it? we can't no longer use the excuse that we're fighting terror or defending our mother land since last week's terror plot gone bad in London proved that there's still much terrorist activity going on outside of Iraq.

So which is it? we'd all like to know why our troops are still there. and please don't say they're protecting us.

thanks for your intelligent responses.

Answer 1

Of course US troops aren't in Iraq to defend us since Iraq has never been a threat. Bush & Co. went into Iraq solely to enrich his buds who own military supply companies. Haliburton received a blank check from U.S. taxpayers and has maxed it out!

What the result of this fiasco is that:
1) terrorism around the world has increased
2) we have started a civil war between sworn enemies (Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds) and are arming and training two sides of the conflict who hate each other more than they hate us.
3) we have destabilized the entire Middle East in the name of "freedom!"

We will remain in Iraq in order for Bush to save face. That is the only reason more Americans will die or be horribly wounded, both physically and mentally. What a disgrace this President is and all who support him should hang their heads!

Answer 2

I really don't know the plan, but it seems that we went in and messed everything up. We can't just leave them to their own devices because it would be bad for everyone to leave a county in such turmoil.
I think probably what the agenda is, is to get the country stabalized enough so that the US has a military base in Iraq where we can keep a closer eye on Iran, who always was the real target in this whole thing. if the US and Britain secure Iraq on one side of Iran and Isreal secures the other side than Iran is going to be powerless.
Iraq never had anything to do with terrorism....at least as far as the US and the UK are concerned.

Answer 3

to start up weren't at conflict. And to evaluate Vietnam to Iraq or Afghanistan is annoying, to many variables to lots distinction. Afghanistan became into to end Taliban and different "undesirable adult men" Iraq we had no company different then killing Sadam. Bt to be trouble-free attempting to place a democracy into the two of those international locations won't take place. as an occasion U.S. government wastes time arguing With 2 significant events, on an analogous time as Iraq has approximately 500. All i'm able to work out in hassle-free is that the powers that be screwed the pooch the two cases.

Answer 4

Protecting against civil war is a great reason to keep troops there. If we left now, the power control would shift. It would not be hard for the same government that attacked us to regain power. So lets say, we leave and just left them there to defend themselves. The old government comes back into power but now are really pissed. What do you think is going to stop them from attacking us again? Any thoughts or did you consider that?

Answer 5

After Saddam was deposed, the mission changed to "Help Iraq secure itself." That hasn't changed, that's still the primary mission, to help the Iraqis fight the insurgents/terrorists (two different groups, one are Ba'athist holdouts, the other are Islamist terrorists, different goals of each group which is why they kill each other, too).

As for when our boys and girls are coming home, it'll probably be another 50 or 60 years. Afterall, we're still in Germany, Japan, and S. Korea. So you'd best get used to it, it ain't changing anytime soon.

Also, try doing a search on "german werewolf" sometime. It'll open your eyes to what's happening in Iraq, in an historical perspective.

Answer 6

There is no plan...That's the problem. The Shiites, Kurds & Sunni's have hated each other for centuries. Only a brutal dictator like Sudaam Husein could keep them from killing each other. Now, Iraq is in a civil war. The exact same thing happened when Tito no longer ruled Yugoslavia.

Answer 7

Who is 'they' that say we are there to mediate a civil war - we have set up Iraq's security force - but we need to ensure that they are properly trained and in control before leaving - otherwise we will have wasted our time. We are almost finished our job there, let's hang in.

Answer 8

The current plan is to win the Battle for Baghdad.

Since this is a fact and I doubt that any of the other people who answer this question even know this (much less answered with it), I would like a best answer from you - only if you're so inclined, of course.

Answer 9

Bush is too busy trying to be Iraq's president to care about the USA has for all the terms. Now we know what neglect is he is like our parent is to a child... and he needs to be charged with neglect.

Answer 10

Leave when the Iraqis can control the country's security. But that's not new. (This question will no doubt bring Bush haters out of the woodwork.)