What about this as a thought for Iraq?

Question

hear me out before you close out thought because I am going to use the words troop withdrawal... but that won't be all I say.

Set a withdrawal date for 1.5 years and set Benchmarks that we feel the Iraqi's need in reasonable time frames.. failure to meet a benchmark takes 3 months off of that 1.5 years.. if a benchmark is met the Iraqi's may opt for a 3 month extension of troops, monetary reimbursement or whatever else may seem appropriate based on the benchmark.

You can't predict a set in stone withdrawal date.. it puts it on the Iraqi's to get things done and it pushes for us to get out in a reasonable time frame... so.. thoughts?

It very well may be Evan.. but it will be vetoed.. and in the end there will have to be compromise somehow.

Answer 1

making a withdrawl public knowledge is a serious mistake.

Answer 2

I hear what you are saying and it might well be an improvement to what is the plan now,that being no plan but I don't like it.
America should never have invaded Iraq to begin with.Maybe that country isn't ready for Democracy.The US needs to pull out now. American soldiers are targets and them being there is a tool in the hands of our enemies propaganda to gain support.Every collateral damage can turn another Iraqi anti American and that would not be the case if the security work was done by Iraqi's themselves.I agree the US broke it but you broke it that bad,you can't fix it anymore.
I still believe installing a Saddam like but US friendly regime would be best at this point

Answer 3

That's essentially waht the Democratic plan is (with some variations). Its a good approach--except for one thing--there need to be strict limits on missed benchmarks as a reason for slowing withdrawal. That's going to be vital--because those benchmarks won't be met.

The reason is that the day-to-day (mis)management of the war is still boing to be in Bush's hands for another 20 months. And that is predicated on the Iraqi government "getting their act toghether and taking responsibility."

And without a major shift in US policy that can't happen--not won't-CAN'T. Because our policy is based on the assumption that the Iraqi government needs to quell terrorist/insurgent radicals. And that's not what's going on.

Look at from the perspective of the Iraqi people--never mind what we think. For them, they see their country invaded by a foreign power--based on false pretences. The continue to be occupied after 4 years. And from their standpoint the Iraqi state is a puppet regime imposed by a foreign power. The election doesn't count for much--they have no experience with democracy and they coulld only vote for candidates approved by the US.

So for them, this is a war of liberation all right--to expel us and overthrow the puppet regime we set up. Therrefore, current policy whichis based on the Iraqi government establishing order and legitimacy is doomed. We either drastically change how we're doing this (which Bush won't) or we simply leave. But don't expect this Iraqi government to handle the job. It isn't going to happen.

BTW--same thing in Vietnam. The Saigon government was a client first of the French, then of the US. It had no legitimacy and zero chance of survival.

Answer 4

It is kind of counter intuitive...the more they meet their benchmarks, the more THEY can decide if they want us there for 3 more months? NO WAY! Sorry, but I do not believe that they will follow us home, I don;t believe that any amount of anything will change the facts of the last 6 years, we will HAVE to accept the consequences of bad and failed policies, and we need to do some damage control at this point. I don't believe that the Iraqi democracy will be sucessful, until they want to fight for it. Sorry, although it is not my decision, I think the best idea is bring the combat soldiers home, and leave soem troops for training security forces. And that is it. Unless they want to PAY us to nation build.

Answer 5

It sounds good, but will never get agreed upon, as this is not about a coherent, well thought out plan. It is about Bush not wanting to admit he was wrong. Rice came out today and said that Bush would not even favor holding the Iraqis accountable for the benchmarks that he and the Iraqis agreed upon.

Answer 6

The only problem as with any withdrawal time table with benchmarks is that all the terrorists need do is prevent the Iraqi government from accopmplishing these benchmarks. Then they just wait for the US to leave. But your plan is no worse than any other on the table.

Answer 7

I would go for a flexible date. You might be onto something. Actually I would set a little shorter total time of 1 year and would tell the Iraqi hirarchy and not the whole blinking world so as to not upset people who don't like time tables of any kind. Government to government in secret talks it could be worked out. Brilliant. Write your reps. I will write mine with the suggestion but will wait for a week to give you a chance to get first credit.

Answer 8

I agree with most of what you say, but, if we make the date for withdraw public, then we are inviting more problems for the Iraq people. But yes, making them responsible for their country is a wonderful solution.

Answer 9

ok fine lets say they really do withdraw later on...but that does not mean that we will not go back again in the future....so whats the point if the some other president decides to go and send troops to Iraq again.....but that's the excitement of life you will not know what is going to happen until it really happens

Answer 10

Bush and his administration realize they made a mistake and he doesn't want the conotation that he left before finishing the job like his daddy did. Everyone said why didn't he go in and get Saddam you know we did. Now we know why?
As soon as he is out of office the next president we all know that is going to get us out of Iraq. It is a waiting game so Bush can save face and say he wasn't the one who did it.
Pulled out before the job was done. It is a legacy thing.

Answer 11

This is a war, you moron.

You NEVER EVER set a date for anything happening in the field.

That is how you get people killed, and their lives are not worth any clever ideas you dream up. If you want to set a date for anything, set a date that is a LIE. Deception is how you fight a war and win, and every commander knows that.

(Whatever happened to letting the generals do the work? Have liberals forgotten their own rhetoric?)