Should we just leave Iraq this minute?

Question

and march right over to Iran and just take care of business, I mean why play these games. If they really just want nuclear power for peaceful purposes then why doesn't the UN not build, maintain, and charge a small fee to power the lights of Iran.

does anyone know sarcasm when they read it ...LOL

I am pleased to have gotten the answers I have, shows once again the majority are not cut and runners as the likes of CNN, and NBC would have you believe.

Answer 1

Iraq is as complicated as brain surgery and President Bush is doing a superb job of it. The media is worthless and downright harmful. Turn them off and you will know a lot more than you do now.

Answer 2

Iran is in shambles on the home front. The economy is dead in the water. They are broke despite sitting on one of Earth's largest oceans of petroleum. People are getting restive and unhappy with the theocratic tyranny there. They desperately need a war with a foreign power to distract the hoi polloi and to get the rest of the Arab world (which is becoming increasingly 'concerned' about their craziness) back on their side. Ignoring their childish piracy was the best strategy. A complete trade embarbo by the US and European 'Union" would finish off Ahmadinutjob and his clerikal kronies. Too bad we can't get anyone over there to see it.

Answer 3

It would be foolish to attack Iran by ourselves, and I doubt that we could get any other country to support us. Our military is not up to the job of invading another large country with a strong military. If we were to use nuclear weapons to attack the Iranian nuclear plants, then I might agree with that tactic.

We need to set a timetable for leaving Iraq and to stick with it. The invasion of Iraq was a bad idea, and the occupation of Iraq was poorly planned and executed.

Answer 4

1) We do not have enough troops right now to take on Iran as well as meet our responsibilities in the real war on terror (ie. Osman Bin landen...Remember him? Some one remind George Bush huh) and uphold our obligations in Iraq

2) We can't leave Iraq. We went in and took apart their country what kind of Honor is there in leaving it a mess? I am not sure what we are suppose to do but it is for sure we can't leave

3) While I agree that we should not let Iran have nuclear weapons. How do we tell one country they can't have nuclear weapons when we have them ourselves? We need to lead the UN in world wide disarmament.

Answer 5

Iraq lost their rights to sovereignity the second they attacked Kuwait, then continued to break the cease-fire, break their agreement repeatedly to cooperate fully with the U.N. while bragging to their allies that they were still keeping WMDs, and when they tried to assassinate our President (USA).

Iran has not. We have to wait. While liberals (I'm a democrat, not liberal) call for invasions of every nation they don't like and then bad-mouth their own country for being in Iraq, the President waits and respects the sovereign rights of Iran until they prove they don't respect ours or those of our allies.

That's why our hands were tied. That's why we "jumped up and down and readied our fists" when they kidnapped those sailors (global positioning pinpointed the position of the ship).

We'll wait. They'll choose. We'll sleep again, or we'll act.

Answer 6

No, no and no.

First if we leave Iraq then as much as I hate to say it, the country will dissolve in a civil war and like Iran the only stable government that can be formed would be a religious one (can you say, :"Hello Taliban?" I thought you could).

Iran is an enemy of the US and they hate us for (in their opinion) some very sound reasons, but they have not declared war on the US nor are they involved in any hostile action against the US. So if the US invaded then they would be condemned by the rest of the world and would have to face sanctions imposed by the UN as well as having to fight Iran's allies like China, France, and North Korea.

Iran is a mountainous country so movement though it would be hard, and combat very difficult. It has a primitive road system and infrastructure, which would channel US forces on those roads making them easy targets. Since the mountain passes are known a few Iranians can stop a large amount of US troops in their tracks. Just watch the film The 300 and you will see what I mean.

If you think the insurgent problem in Iraq is hard the insurgent problem in Iraq will be 10 times as bad. Remember the Iranians are taught, daily, since birth that the US is the Great Satan and Iran's worst enemy. Combat in Iran would make the hedgerows in France and Belgium look like a walk in the park.

If the US invaded Iran then the rest of the Middle East including our allies like Saudi Arabia would rise against us. Russia wouldn’t be too happy either since Iran is a good customer for their arms and munitions. North Korea might get involved so that it can take the US down a few pegs without having to face world distain. All of the enemies of the US will want to at least support Iran in its war (can you say, “World War Three?” I thought you could).

Iran doesn’t have any nuclear weapons, but they have enough nuclear material to create a few thousand dirty bombs. They would set up a radioactive zone between the US and the majority of the population, even if it meant years of suffering birth defects and a higher death rate caused by the radiation. Most Iranians wouldn’t understand radiation and would ignore the threat. Many of those that do understand the threat think it would be worth the penalty if they could stop the US Army. There would be few other was to do it and if chemical or biological weapons were used then the world would come down on Iran. If they used a weapon of last resort, and a limited one, like a dirty bomb attack then they could claim that it was an attack of desperation and so a valid one. Also Iran may not be able to manufacture as many nuclear bombs as it wants, but they could have made one or two and they could have bought one from North Korea. The chances are that they do not, but the chance that they might have is too great to ignore.

Every terrorist and rebel organization from the Ukraine to South America would rise in attacks against the US. They could claim to be defending Iran and so become heroes in the eyes of the world and the people that they are trying to influence. Most of these attacks would fail, but the terrorists only have to get lucky once. The defenders have to block every single attack. For those of you who say that terrorism never changed government policy need to talk to the former government of Spain who were replaced after the Madrid Bombing. They also need to talk to Tony Blair who has promised to resign this year. A lot of the resentment against him is fueled by his support of the US in Iraq and by the London Subway Bombings. If Tony Blair did not promise to resign then his government would fall and his party would be replaced in a vote of no confidence that would put all of the House of Commons up for election.

The threat that the Iran might have cut off it’s oil supply to the rest of the world was responsible for an almost 100% increase in the price of gas last year. If Iran really did cut off its supply of oil, especially to nations like Japan (an ally of the US) then the price of oil wouldn’t just double it would increase by a factor of three, four, or even five. Imagine having to pay $5 to $10 dollars for a gallon of gas. I know that I couldn’t and I would probably become homeless, as would a large part of the poor. It doesn’t matter if I have a car or not, I would still have to pay for food and electricity and the high price of those would drive all other prices high. I don’t say that this would create a crash like that of the Great Depression, but it would bring about the greatest depression since the great depression and it would be worldwide (Can you say, “Global economic crisis?” I thought you could). How long would the world stand for this, how long could American stand for this, how long could you? I think not more than a few days would be the most common response.

Personally I would love to see Iran turned into one huge glass parking lot, but if I think about the results of that (which sends a cold shiver down my back) then I realize the situation is more complicated and that bombing Iran back into the Stone Age (not a very far trip for most of the country) wouldn’t be a good idea.

[My apologies to Mr. Roger’s Neighborhood. Can you forgive me, I thought you could.]

Answer 7

Even though the idea sounds good in theory (getting rid of the mullahs) yet it will not be an easy march and we won't be able to take care of the business just like that.

Answer 8

We need to slowly start pulling back in Iraq, conveniently to the Iranian border. Then ratchet up the pressure. Watch that little midget leader squirm!

Answer 9

UN Doesn't care for anything what has it done in a while that everyone likes. No it be wrong thing to do and the stupidest move ever in war.

Answer 10

because Iran is a sovereign nation. The "UN" cant just march in any more than they can march into the U.S. and take over our nuke programs.