How do we get out of Iraq without looking like failures?

Question

I know I sound callow when I ask this question, but how can we get out of Iraq while saving face?

I think we should add 50,000 more soldiers, go on a three month CRACKDOWN campaign, declare Iraq stable, and get out of there. FAST! Then again, I wouldn't want to be apart of that extra 50,000.

Maybe I'm overthinking it. Maybe we should just declare that our mission to be successful and leave. I don't see anything wrong with leaving Iraq and then spinning it as a victory. lol...Hey, don't laugh, at least it's a plan.

Answer 1

You can't.

Answer 2

Why worry about 'saving face'? Why not try something foreign to most politicians: honesty!
Why not stand up and say, "Hey, we made a terrible mistake. We thought there were weapons of mass destruction, and we thought Iraq had something to do with the 9-11 attacks. But,as it turned out, Iraq was a sovereign nation that in now way threatened, provoked or attacked the U.S.A.
The only reason we illegally and unconstitutionally invaded Iraq was because the Bush family had a personal vendetta against Hussein from the Desert Storm days, and because Dick Cheney wants all that OIL swimming underneath Iraq's sand.
If we wanted to bring democracy to the world, we'd be sending troops to Darfur, but Darfur doesn't have any easily accessible so OIL, so we don't give a damn if millions are killed, raped, or displaced. It's "not our business".
Of course, we keep saying we'll be out of Iraq by 2009, but then why are we building the largest embassy in the world on a 104-acre site in downtown Baghdad overlooking the headquarters of the 'new' Iraqi government which we helped install? Because we're gonna be in Iraq until we suck every single drop of OIL out of that country's sand.
And, by spring, 2007, we'll also be invading Iran (as soon as the administration can come up with a plausible reason that those 'ditto heads' will 'buy'). And we'll be invading Iran for the very same reason: OIL. Rich fields of easily-accessible OIL. -RKO-

Answer 3

We've got to do it without adding more soldiers. To do it without looking like failures, we've got to hand the job over to the Iraqi people. They have to be able to do the "police work" we are currently doing. (Very difficult) They will probably need our support for finaces and weapons,supplies and training for a long time, but this is what we didn't plan on when we got into the country and tried to make it a democracy. In a way we created the mess, now we've got to clean it up. The problem is that all the good people are scared because of the extremist tactics.

Answer 4

Reggie: You get points for trying. We may be closer to success than you might think. The Iraqis will have to find a set of balls and put a stop to some of the bloodshed themselves. They are getting closer to doing that and once the violence subsides, we can start moving out.

Terrorists from all over the world have made Iraq their Battleground One. They have had some success, but they have also taken a lot of losses. This could turn fast.

Answer 5

How do we get out and save face?
We don't.
We won't stay in Iraq indefinitely, and unless a miracle occurs -- a stable democracy actually takes hold, Iraqi forces become self-sufficient in maintaining their own security -- we're going to come out with significant loss of face.
You last observation resembles the Nixon stance at the end of the war in Vietnam: declare victory and leave. It may end up coming to that.

Answer 6

I think we should just leave. If we are truly not there for the oil we leave.
If the people of Iraq are going to stand up and take charge of their own country and destiny they will do it. We cant just assume that we know the right thing for them.
That wont happen though because we are there until a stable pro US government is locked in place for years to come and the oil starts flowing. Keep buying massive cars you dont need fools.

Answer 7

I think we should take the money that we would pay our troops to be there and hire other free poorer countries to go in there and finish stabilizing. That way we won't leave the Iraqi government to come crashing down on the Iraqi people by getting out before they've gotten things under control yet we can get our men home.

Answer 8

1) We close down all US and NATO military training facilities for one year.

2) We get 200,000 Iraqis into those facilities and run them through Army boot camp. We don't care if they were baathists before the war or not.

3) We equip these men and send them back to Iraq.

4) We leave.

At that point, we can say to the world, we did everything humanly possible, we left them with more soldiers than we had stationed there. If it all went to Hades after we left, it's not because WE failed, it's because THEY failed.

Answer 9

50,000 more troops? Sounds like a plan- the only problem: they wouldn't keep them there for just 3 months. But I do believe that extra troops for maybe 6 months, going door-to-door to eradicate any and all problems- the getting the f*ck out of there! Then Dubya can, again, claim victory!

Answer 10

We should have sent our "elite" troops there in the beginning but since we didn't now is the time....no need to tell the rest of the world - go in do what it takes then get out! I doubt many more Iraqi citizens would be killed but if that's what it takes...one thing about it no one dies until their number flips!
The USA can't afford to keep sending our kids to slaughter or to financially keep supporting Iraqi civilians...it's past time to start looking out for America & Americans!

Answer 11

Pull back to Kuwait, set up a quick reaction Brigade and keep an eye on Iraq. Offer assistance other than military as much as possible and react to major events.

Iraq has to start getting ready, simple as that. We cannot do this forever...