Why not get out of Iraq now?

Question

Similar questions to mine have been asked over the past few months - a (very) few are thoughtful, but most are highly ideological one liners. Recently I read and heard comments about the idea that, eventually, we will leave Iraq (1 month? 15 years?), then there will be violence and instability, no matter when we leave. For example, when the British left Iraq in the 1920's, there was chaos for a while, then stability, then they kicked out foreign interests. Similar to when the British left India. So why not get out very soon and let the violence happen - no question it will stop at some point and there will be (relative) stability. An Iraqi intellectual recently confirmed as much: leave, there will be violence for a while, then stability. It's obvious there are some risks, like there always are. But don't forget that slippery slopes rarely are.

Answer 1

because we are not done please stop crying about it until we finish our job like it or not.

Answer 2

Why can't people see through to the crux of this problem. First of all, this started as an agenda to rid Iraq of Saddam, this has been done. Next, the agenda was to establish democracy in Iraq. This has been done. Yet, we are still fighting and losing our sons and daughters, on a daily basis.

Now we are fighting an Islamic jihad, backed by Iran and Syria. Iran is the Persian country of Shiite Islamics extremists who have sworn to destroy our ally, Israel. Syria is the Arab country that arms,, recruits, and dispatches insurgents to fight in Iraq, against the Americans and does the same for Hezbollah who crowds it's way into Lebonan, and positions itself for more activity against Israel.

If ever we had a mortal enemy that needed to be neutralized, it is these two enemies. For the US to capitulate would be sad for the world, because these very troublesome participants will continue their evil agenda, until they are stopped! I believe it is the duty of the US to take a leadership role in seeing that this is accomplished! Strangely enough, their are Arab country's that would agree with this assessment. They would agree because they so no advantage to an all powerful Iran.

Answer 3

You make a good point. The sooner we get out of Iraq, the better off the Iraqi's will be. Because we ARE there, we make the entire country a target for unspeakable abuse... all in the name of embarrassing America.

But then again, there's money to be made as long as we stay in this never-ending -cough- "war" -cough- and the political power jockeys won't let go of the strings anytime soon, if ever.

The people in control have too much to lose.

Answer 4

You need to bear in mind that it's never been about just creating a Stable Democratic Iraq, the goal is a Stable Democratic Pro-U.S. Iraq with a government that will dance solely to our tune. I honestly believe that left to themselves the country would fragment, the Shiites would go with Iran, the Kurds would go with Turkey, and the Sunnis, who have no Oil fields, would probably fall victim to the expanded Iran. Iraq has never had any meaningful identity as a Nation, it's an artificiality imposed by European powers, just as the Soviets turned the Czechs and the Slovaks into one country, which dissolved as soon as there was no longer a gun at their heads. Whatever happened in Iraq, the U.S. would no longer have any control over to whom they sold their oil, and that will never be acceptable to our current administration. Don't much care for this rationale, certainly don't agree with it, but it's probably why we don't leave, and have no plans to leave any time soon.

Answer 5

Consider this, there are nuclear powers in the middle east. To allow this violence you speak of to pass would end in the use of nuclear weapons. Even if the use of those weapons was contained in the middle east, fallout saturated wind and irradiated rivers would effectively spread radiation across Asia and Europe. Such mass explosions would introduce fallout into the jetstreams which could spread it across the world. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

Answer 6

We should of just made the country part of the U.S. (Puerto Rico), and renamed it "I Rock" because the only point of war is to conquer and hold territory. Anything else is just playing politics with people's lives.

Answer 7

You did a great job of answering your own question. I totally agree with you.