Will simply leaving Iraq solve the problem?

Question

Now, huge number of the Americans are eager to get over with this bloody situation with Iraq.

They say bring our troops back home.

Do you think just simply leaving Iraq now will solve the problem? Or will it create more problems?

Why is leaving Iraq right now good or not good?

What do we need to accomplish in order to bring our troops home?

Answer 1

This struggle isn't about Iraq or Afghanistan or Iran and Syria. This is about changing hearts and minds. I have my criticisms of the Bush administration but I believe he is doing the best job he knows how to do, and I believe this country was caught with its breeches down on 9/11. We didn't know how to react, because we simply didn't have the information we needed at the time to make informed decisions. This is the fog of war. We know this, we suspect that, and none of it is sure. I have to lay a large part of that at the feet of Bill Clinton because he cut the budget of the military and intelligence organizations to balance the federal budget while spending like drunken sailors on everything else. He said last Sunday that "he was aware of the threat of Bin Laden and that he tried and failed to kill Bin Laden but at least he tried." But the tragedy of 9/11 was exacerbated by the fact that we had nobody in intelligence with boots on the ground in the Middle East to listen to the political climate, to collect the kind of information that can't be retrieved with satellites and spy planes.

The real issue here is, what will make Muslims less of a threat to world peace and security? And the answer as far as I can see is to convince the mouthpieces and those that trust them, that prosecuting aggression against the west will not net them the results they seek. They have plainly spoken their agenda and it isn't to be taken lightly. They want to rule the world and they have multiple plans in operation to achieve just that.

One way is to immigrate to western states as in France and by sheer numbers take over the government. Another is by force as in Spain. Another is Bin Laden's way. He believed we would not respond in a long drawn out campaign because we have lost our American spirit. Bush told us atop the pile of rubble that it would require a long drawn out campaign to accomplish the necessary task to turn the tide of terror. It only took months for half the country to forget those words. Was Bin Laden right? Have we lost our spirit? http://judgeright.blogspot.com under the article titled "In Their Own Words" you'll find many links to video of their most popular political and religious leaders exactly that under the bold words.

Why do the media prosecute a war against American reputation in the world, even our own media? They compare the actions of a few Americans to those of all terrorists and demand that we treat them according to edicts of the Geneva Convention when they are not held to the same standards. The reveal our secret operations and methods of interrogations which by the way do not even enter the same solar system as the jihadi's treatment of captured citizens let alone military. They compare our operations against aggressors with their targeting of innocent civilians.

Personally, I wish they would treat this as more of a conventional war. Again on my blog, you'll find that the TV networks are spewing murder and hatred 24/7 through music videos and movies and just about every religious program against the West. In Iran, Syria, Palestine, etc., over Palestinian Authority TV and al Jezeera. We have to blast our own TV signal into these regions to get the message of the West into the people because they are getting nothing else from their own networks. It is popular to hate the west, it is taught in the school curriculum in Iran, it is overwhelmingly accepted that the West is the Great Satan.

I am not looking for a new crusade, but logic tells me that a great defeat, and blame for mass destruction on the heads of these same leaders, called down on them by their own words, is the only way to change this torrent of mass lies and hysteria.

P*ssy footing around and blaming America for the damage done to innocents, as the media and half our politicians are doing is strengthening the enemy's resolve and encouraging their recruitment rates. Whereas, flattening the capitols of 1 or 2 countries could save the long drawn out struggle. Look at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. These two explosions brought a long drawn out struggle to an abrupt end. Many lives were saved on balance. Had the struggle continued as it had for two more years, as much as a million troops from both sides would have been lost not to mention the innocents that were dieing from the carpet bombing campaigns. Just because we have the technology to surgically strike does not make surgical strikes the best option. Our reputation is suffering in the world anyway, what motivation do we have to continue a struggle with surgical strikes when a double standard is applied to our forces compared to our enemy's? What benefit to innocent lives if the struggle continues for another 5 or 20 years?

Why does the U.N. condemn U.S. tactics while the terrorists march merrily on with heinous acts against civilians? I don't like being seen as the big bully on the block either, but thanks to the U.N., the media, and half our politicians, that is our image. Sometimes people need to see a bully tactic to gain perspective on reality. Reality is, up till now, we have been the only morally influenced party in this conflict. If we know the location of al Jezeera and the Palestinian Authority's TV broadcasting operation, they should be powder by now. If we hear another dictator dictate morality to us, he should be in the very same condition. If we know Bin Laden or any other terrorist leader is within a 50 mile radius, we should dump a radio active firestorm on his cave, mountain, or city. See how long the attitude of blame America carries on, then. I guarantee that every country's leader will dump the bodies of these gnats called terrorists on our doorstep pleading us to take our big stick and go home, because they will make sure we have nothing to worry about anymore.

Answer 2

Tough questions to answer. I hear from friends who have relatives over there in the military that say things are getting better in some ways and worse in others. To leave Iraq right now would in some ways be good in the short term but maybe not in the long term. The original goal was to get rid of Saddam which we did and then help the people there set up there own Democratic government. One that has free elections and a good Constitution that covers everyone no matter what their ethnic background is. But from watching the in fighting between the different tribes I don't know if they will get past that enough to live together in a free society. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink. Yet if it is successful it will be a great victory for the world. We don't want to dominate or conquer Iraq or anywhere else only help them to be a free people run by laws that they all agree on and vote for. Not having to live in fear of a dictator who could have you killed just because he doesn't like the way you walk or something. But is their freedom if it is successful going to catch on over there? Are we taking too big a risk putting our men and women in harms way in the hopes that democracy and individual freedom wins over terrorism? I think we must win the war on terrorism. I'm just not sure if we are going about it in the right way. Sorry but I have no absolute answers to your questions as I have the same ones myself. In some ways I agree with Bush and on some things I disagree. But I think he is an honest man doing a hard job in troubled times. So I pray a lot. lol

Answer 3

We are going to leave anyway. We can't solve anything whether we stay or not. If Bush had brought all the troops home on his famously fake 'Mission Accomplished" day, Iraq probably would have fixed itself and Bush would have looked like an f'in genius. It might even have worked as late as the first Iraqi election -

But it's all over now. The Republican cut-and-run mantra has insured that we will appear to leave defeated because there is no way out that does not fit their definition of cut-and-run, regardless of when it happens.

The conservative republicans have made sure that the rest of the world will see us as losers - thanks a lot for putting your political agenda above the best interests of the country and the world - fools.

Answer 4

I think that if we leave the Iraqis will turn full force on themselves. The terrorist that are there will either have to choose a side or be wiped out by the other three groups. In the end I believe the terrorist will either go home or go to Afghanistan to fight us there. As for Iraq it will become 2or 3 new countries Kurdistan in the north. Shiastan in the south. Sunnistan in the middle if they survive. while this is going on we can concentrate our army in Afghanistan and really let our forces go at it. There are no real cities in Afghanistan and we control those areas that try to pass themselves off as a city. So the enemy is in the mountains and we can cut of a major funding source for the terrorist the poppy fields. That would be a truly killing of two birds with one stone the drug dealers and the terrorist what a deal!

Answer 5

Nope. If we take the man's argument for why the US went there.
An abrupt pull out would cause a power vacuum effectively giving iraq to disruptive elements. Even to his ulterior motive this does not bode well. So all that blood and guts for nothing. Basically the US destroyed that country for nothing.
Its a hornets nest. Its damned if you do and damned if you dont. You get f ked either way.
If you stay in. You are putting in risk all these american lives for what? Is this in defense of the motherland??? For corporate america? For the US government? And the longer you are there in a strong arm stance the more the moslem people will take this as a slight to their sovereignty . Damn bush and his policies. The old man was better at this than this one is.

Answer 6

No one here can really say if we should leave now or later. Who's to say really if we leave now what we have done will be in vain. We are trying to help the people over there, it's just that more and more insurgents are going to rise up. We just need to have our leaders rush and try to get the job done a little more quickly so we can leave. But once we leave no one can really say if this sh*t storm will start up again ina couple years or not. all we can really hope for is once we leave, we leave with a job well done and try to take as many preventive measures so nothing bad happens in Iraq again.

Answer 7

No warfare is powerful! It hurts, it destroys. The very lives of ppl, animals, little ones. It hurts training, marketplace, commerce. that's not strong. even as i stands out as the first to assert we ought to deliver our troops domicile, thinking how volatile the whole mid-east area has been, traditionally, I doubt bringing which will be certain something. We received't listen from the rulers and kings right away yet we can. there'll be "in-fights" and coups and plausible insurrections from interior. All of this stuff will impact on our international economic gadget interior the way of oil expenditures. we are ALL depending on the black gold and unsolved issues will ultimately sparkling out and trickle down. i'm fascinated about procuring and promoting troops on the floor for bombers interior the sky. no longer many terrorists have planes or missiles so, because the music says; won't be able to contact this!

Answer 8

Depends on how you define the problem I imagine. The problem as I see it is stabilizing their government on their terms prior to leaving. Why?

Our military presence there has angered a percentage of the population...but there is a large population that wants the US there to assist in rebuilding there schools, hospitals, power and water plant, road,etc. because the current Iraqi government can not do it on their own. And no civilian contractor would be foolish enough to work there (regardless of the $$$) without military protection...US military.

Leaving prior to ensuring the Iraqi government can provide for their own internal security and security from outside their boarders invites 10 years of civil unrest and possible "military assistance" from Iran. Remember, the country they fought for a decade?

And for those of you considering the political future for the area beyond continuous warfare? Imagine the possible future for the area if a real democracy was established that eventually didn't require our military presence? For those of you who have not been in the middle east, a democratic Muslim state is a major fear of the Arab world. If you have to ask why, you don't know anything about the history of the region.

Answer 9

I don't mean to be curt, but the 1st of your three questions fails to identify specifically, 'the problem'. I can only assume that you are referring to either the chaos/instability that exists throughout the country, or the continual blood that is being wastefully shed by our troops. Let's assume both!

I believe it was Winston Churchill that said: ' if we don't learn from history, we are doomed to repeat it'! Well, we should have learned from the British experience in Iraq! Chaos and failure.
The current problems that we face are one's that we created by failing to have the proper foresight that was so readily apparent. Lack of preparedness for the fallout from the invasion, as well as the social, cultural, religious, and ethnic ignorance, has led to the current state of affairs. This ignorance applies to the majority of the American public, not just the current administration.

The administration is culpable enough! However, it's a bit late for the American people to finally realize they've been hoodwinked. Blind obedience in support of the 'cowboy in chief'? Moreover, extending his reign for 4 more yrs.? Shame on you!
Again, it's a bit late to lose our nerve. As Colin Powell said: 'we break it, we own it!'

Now that we're stuck, we can't leave prematurely. Unfortunately!
As bad as Saddam was, he was useful in the sense that a 'balance of power' was maintained in the region. Our invasion has destabilized the region and created the arena where political and religious hegemony is the prize. For a western power, it's difficult to win! Furthermore, China and Russia have a vested interest in petroleum rich countries as their needs continue to grow. While we are draining our resources and fight amongst ourselves, they are growing stronger; biding their time like vultures!

Western democratic guidelines and principles can be offered as a template for establishing govts. that are reflective of our notion of democracy. Yet we cannot be so inflexible that digressions will not be tolerated or accepted. What works for us may not work exactly the same way elsewhere. We need to respect that! Let's take solace in the unique distinctions that we have from others. Yet, let us respect the same distinctions of others.

So, let us lead the way by bringing the different parties to the negotiating table. Advise and encourage them. Then, we must walk away with our heads held high. That is all we can do and ask for. Perhaps we can recover our lost respect! Maybe then we can leave with honor!

Answer 10

Nope can't leave now we broke it we own it.
I say we re institute the draft and recruit every abled bodied American man and woman and send them into the breech (yes I served, for 5 years in the Army).
That way the next time an American President lies to us and tells us we must got to war there will be more citizens with war time experience that will make that President give good solid reasons for why we should shed American blood.

We need to stand firm and fix what we broke. Can't cut and run now