DRAGON asks: Is pulling out of Iraq really a failure if we save the lives of our troops?

Question

Iraq should be taking care of itself by now. We cannot and should not be responsible for every country in the world(even if we did set it up).

DRAGON 2008
"I BELIEVE IN U.S."

I agree that we should have never went over. I do not think anything bigger is going. I think Bush wants those countries to drawn by the prodding of other countries to better justify an invasion. It is about oil and saving face.

Answer 1

only in the way that millions would die due to the lack of our being there. See, it does not matter now if one believes we should have gone in the first place or not. We are there. Thus, all the folks who helped us would be killed, all the folks that do not follow the talaban would be killed. So as in Vietnam, even if we should nat have gone in the first place, the troops need to finish or as in nam there will be a huge blood bath

Answer 2

If there had only been a couple American lives lost in Iraq in April I would be apt to agree with those who say the surge is working and that we should, perhaps stay. Unfortunately 103 Americans lost their lives in Iraq in April. This was the worst month of the year so far. If that sort of thing continues I doubt we will ever see the Iraqi government have the control they need.

We need to set benchmarks with the Iraqi government. As they reach the benchmarks we help them along to the next. We need to set a final date for withdrawal (1.5 years would be fine). Make the benchmarks achievable and believable for them. Don't broadcast to the world that the benchmarks exist but work out something with them. If they miss a bench mark we move up our departure. So the more they miss the sooner we come home. That will give them an incentive to do what they need to do. We also need to talk to other nations in the region and let them know that if and when we leave we would like their support for what happens in Iraq and to stay out of it.

That benchmark and earlier withdrawal idea come from another poster on this board. I like it so well I wrote to my reps in Washington and suggested that they consider it.

The funding also is allocated for this 1.5 years. If we get out earlier than the funding will still be there for any mop up we might need to do. Maybe it could also be used to help National Guard companies replenish their equipment.

This plan helps both Congress and the President save face, the troops will get funded and we will have our people back home by Christmas of next year no matter what.

Answer 3

You're right! Iraqis should be stabilizing the country on their own. We need to stop being the crutch and taking all the fire. However, with that being said, even though we would save lives, and I'm all for that, first and foremost, if we leave now, if we pull the crutch, Iraq would collapse. We went in there without a plan, and we haven't made enough progress in assuring Iraq can survive on its own. It'd be like the extra cupcake at a birthday party, with the bigger, more organized neighbors fighting over it. If that happens, it would be a failure. I don't support the war, but I want to see us fix our mistakes, so we don't make bigger fools of ourselves than we already have.

Answer 4

If you dont understand the reasons we went over there then you are equally not going to understand the consequences of leaving before the job is done which would be horrible.

A. Anti-war liberals would be validated as being the first to say America couldnt pull it off, that we are inept militarily as well as the war on terror and the best strategy for dealing with terrorism is the democrat/socialist strategy is to leave them alone, appease them, give them things and hope they like you and go away.

B. Our military would be viewed as weak and countries that hate us would take a more aggressive posture.

C. What happens to the animal in the wild that is a popular target and viewed as weak? It gets relentlessly assaulted until it is food for others!

D. It would send a message to the world saying that capitalism weakens countries and promote communism.

E. It would give hope to Americas enemies in and our of uniform.

F. It would be a massive moral victory for AL Queda to have braggin rights that they kicked us out of Iraq encouraging recruitment and support.

G. State sponsors of terror like Iran would most likely be left alone to nuclear arm.

H. Between Vietnam and Iraq, the US would set a future precedent that after 2 years, military action should be discontinued no matter what is happening.

I. I would set a standard that we should cease trying to fight tyranny and terrorism in the future.

J. It would greatly demoralize our army placing part of the blame for the defeat on them.

K. The 2nd largest oil fields in the middle east would be used to help fund terrorism.

L. In all liklihood a REAL civil war would break out with millions dead until they get their next Iranian Shia dictator who would be vehemently anti-US and another arm of Iran.

M. The kurds who are the only Iraqis that really have their act together would be threatened and attacked under such circumstances. (Kurd cities are statistically safer than ours)

N. Israel would be one step closer to getting an all out invasion from Muslim nations.

O. Oil and gas prices would go through the roof. We could be looking at $5-10/gal gas if such a war started.

Did I leave anything out?

Answer 5

Pulling out of Iraq will be a failure if the terrorist regimes take over and are able to set up their base there. Especially if it results in another large scale attack within the US.

I find it amazing that so many people including many Congressional leaders believe that Iraq should be taking care of itself after such a short time (four years). This is a country that was physically and mentally beaten down for more than a generation. A large part of the population didn't know anything but fear of the government. It is going to take time for attitudes to change and democracy to take hold.

Answer 6

I don't think pulling out of Iraq would constitute as a failure. This is not our war it seems. It seems as though Iraq is having their own civil war and we're just dancing in the middle of it. In the beginning, after 9/11, I agreed going after the terrorists... but Iraq has just turned into complete nonsense. I fully support our troops, being that my husband is also one, and I support our president no matter who they are but I strongly disagree with how this is all being handled. Too many lives have been lost and our boys need to come home. If we bring our troops home and use the billions of dollars and man power used for the war and applied them to national security and controlling bad foreigners coming in and who already are living here, then that would allow our military to stay at home with their families, and more importantly live, and it would create more jobs and a more secure nation.

Answer 7

I want to save the lives of our troops too, and I agree that Iraq should be taking care of itself by now.

However, if we pull out before they are taking care of themselves, then the situation is likely to spiral into a full fledged civil war - which will more than likely require us to go back into a worse situation than what we are now. This would also be destabillizing to the rest of the Middle East, and thereby, it could lead to a warlike domino effect. We could save a lot of the troops now, but lose a lot more later.

Of course, it may not lead to that. Maybe the Iraqis would step up and take care of themselves if we left. We've not seen any evidence to support that as of yet, however.

TO THE ANSWERER DIRECTLY ABOVE ME:

If you see this, could you embellish a little bit more on what you said concerning Russia, Iran and Syria. I believe that something is going on, but I've not made the connection that you have, let me know what you think, please.

RUTH:

Thank you - I've made most of those connections, too. I've not thought that we were staving off WWIII by staying in Iraq. Interesting - you've given me something to think about.

Answer 8

Shouldn't the fighting have already stopped? After all, we did liberate them from a ruthless dictator. SIGH. If only world politics were as simple and as black-and-white as some people would have us believe. I believe in patriotism, but why is it used so often as a tool to make countries rush into war?

Bring the troops safely home.

Answer 9

We shouldnt be respsonsible for anyone except ourselves. Thats why we created the league of nations, the united nations, amnesty international, unicef, ect ect. Who made America the parent of everyone else? There has to be a cut off point in this war where we say this is enough. Over 3,200 of your soldiers have died and many many civilians in these countries have died. How much is enough? How much longer are w going to stay the course simply because we are over there and involved? The benefits no longer outweight the costs and its time to cut our losses.

Answer 10

No,

We can pull back to other areas outside of Iraq to guarantee that nearby Syria or Iran don't step into the vacuum and just let the Iraqis fight it out to eliminate Al Qaeda (in Iraq) and determine just who gets what in their new 'democracy'.

Answer 11

the things one must think of though.. If we pull out otmarrow is saves lives now... if we would pull out and Iraq goes back to at least as bad as it was.. most likely in 10 years we would have to go back in there again and lose more lives later, after they have rebuilt their defences and whatever puppet dictator is installed, either by a religious sect, or even by Iran.

I don;t want us to be there any longer than we have to, but thast is one big thing to think about when persons are calling for a pullout right now

It;s just like how Bush 41 gets blame for not finishing the job, even though he followed the coalition's plan as it was to be... to liberate Kwait (sp?) . But as o ne can see 10 ears later we ended right back there again and with the middle east a hotspot as it is , it could beeven as short as 5 years if we pulled out today.... its not as simple as pull out now and save lives