can peace be restored if the US government depart Iraq?

Answer 1

No. If there is no peace when we leave, the government of Iraq doesn't have what ti takes to create a peace among the religious factions.

Answer 2

what kind of peace are you looking for? if you want the sort of "peace" that existed under Saddam where there was not regular bombings but people lived in fear then yes. "Peace" could be restored if we left Iraq right now. If we want to ensure a better life for Iraqis then we need to remain until they can stand against all obstacles that they encounter. Each day they get stronger and the day will come when they have the ability to function on their own but its just not quite there yet. Speak with an Iraqi and see what they think. 98% of the population is happy we are there and sees the good we do everyday. Unfortunately the news only reports on the happennings of the other 2%.

Answer 3

"Restored" would mean there was peace there before the US troops arrived, which there wasn't.

I hope peace can be established at some point. Some of the leaders there are coming together and asking for the halt of insurgent attacks and the importation of terrorists from surrounding countries. They're aware of how important peace is, and how the conflicts affect all the countries in the area in a negative way. Unfortunately, there hasn't been peace in the Middle East in many, many years. No one can make it happen except the people who live there.

Answer 4

I really hope so, but the U.S. has burned many imporant bridges. To get peace, some of the challenges to be dealt with include:

1. The ex-Baathists that the U.S. summarily kicked out of Saddam's military need to be brought to heel, but as pariahs with no stake whatsoever in the current Iraqi government it's not at all clear how to do that.

2. The al Qaeda faction in Iraq has to be shut down. They also have no stake in a peaceful Iraq and their mission is to sow discord among the factions. Unfortunately, we've given them some excellent material to work with.

3. The sectarian killings between Sunni and Shi'a factions has to stop. You can't have peace---much less democracy---if you don't have basic security, and with significant portions of the population trying to wipe each other out it's gone way beyond fence mending.

Who can do something about it? Well, it's easier to enumerate who can't:

The U.S. Military can't. As it is it is heavily stretched, and short of a draft to recruit maybe half a million or more soldiers and probably bankrupting the U.S. in the process the military resources to bring the situation under control by force just aren't there. We could try soft power except between the "go it alone" strategy, the inept handling of the conflict, and various gaffes like Abu Ghraib the U.S. has done about as good a job as possible to annihilate its political and moral legitimacy in the fight, to the point where the U.S. military presence is a perverse unifier of many factions in the region: Hatred of the U.S. is one of the few points agreement anyone can find in Iraq.

Nouri al Maliki's government can't. They don't have the strength. What strength they have is to a large degree on loan from Moqtada al Sadr's Mahdi militia, and it's not clear to what degree they're keeping the peace and to what degree they're actually partaking in the sectarian violence. The latter situation and the relatively large presence of Shi'ites in the al Maliki government make the whole government seem sufficiently Shi'a dominated that it's hard to keep sectarianism out, because in politics perception all too often is reality. And leaving the possibility of corruption aside, there are too many internal elements in Iraq aligned against them: ex-Baathists, estranged Sunnis, al Qaeda agitation. It's hard to see how the Iraqi government can deal with all of that and have more than a pittance of resources left over after fighting just to stay alive.

So if the U.S. military left it would likely be a very double-edged matter. On the one hand, their departure would remove any doubt in the minds of folks in the region of imperial intentions on the part of the U.S. and remove a major source of resentment feeding the violence there. On the other hand, given the relationship between al Sadr's forces and the al Maliki government, the U.S. presence was providing external observation and some measure of deterrence against all-out sectarian violence, both on the street and in the al Maliki government. If the U.S. leaves who's to say that al Sadr won't suddenly decide to part ways with al Maliki, taking his forces with him, especially if the sectarian violence surges in the wake of a U.S. departure? Will a departure take the wind out of al Qaeda's recruiting efforts in the area and leave ex-Baathists and Sunnis with less to fight about, or will the vacuum of their departure only draw in more violence?

If all those questions can be answered, and things work out right, it might yet be possible to have peace in Iraq. Unfortunately, it's hard to see how the path there will be anything other than long and painful.

Answer 5

Yes but not in the near future. The country has to be accepting of peace and due to the high amount of IED's and suicide bombers, there can not be peace until the people stop attacking each other which won't be any time soon.

Answer 6

This is not a yes or no question, really. It's a "Yes, but...." sort of question.

The US will eventually leave Iraq. It may be after peace is established, or it may take the US leaving for the Iraqis to want peace.

Answer 7

If there are no US Troops there the foriegn fighters will go elsewhere. Muqtada al Sadr will make short work of Al Quieda in Iraq and the Baathist.

Answer 8

The answer is NO. The US government went in and upset the balance. There will be large scale bloodshed if they do not remain to complete the task.

Answer 9

Not immediately and perhaps not at all, after all this. But definitely the situation will not get better until the US is long gone from Iraq.

Answer 10

Sure,,, it will become the Shi'a nation that Ronald Reagan spent billions trying to prevent.