Does the Bush administration ever want Iraq to start standing on its own two feet?

Question

The White House opposes any approach that would punish the Iraqi government with a loss of aid or U.S. troop withdrawals if certain goals are not met.
It seems to me, there needs to be a motivational factor for the Iraqis to become their own police and their own government.
I

Answer 1

I agree. And who occupied America in 1776 and fought our wars for us when we were a new country? If we could fight off the most powerful nation in the world at that time (Britain) then why can't the Iraqis fight a few insurgents themselves? And if they do not have the will now, then when will they?

Answer 2

Yes. The war in Iraq was never about an independent Iraq, though installing a puppet regime that will create a favorable investment climate for US business is certainly a beneficial outcome from the US' perspective.

That said, yes, at this point they do, but certainly not for altruistic reasons. This war, illegal and immoral, unjustifiable, and potentially treasonous, is an albatross around the necks of all of the members of the current administration. They want it to go away as soon as possible because they are starting to understand, despite their hubris, that their legacy may well be that of the worst Presidential administration in the history of the US. The only way they can see the US walk away under their watch and call this a victory will be through an independent Iraq.

Answer 3

Its not going to happen--and here's why. From the standpoint of the Iraqi people (78%) of whome want the US out, the Iraqi government is not legitimate. For them, it is simply a puppet regime set up by a foreign invader. And that--getting rid of us and that government--is the major driving force behind the insurgency.

Even if we do manage to quesll the violence a little and create a moment of stability, the Iraqi people are going to overthrow that government as soon a as we leave--whether we stay 2 months or 2 decades.

Answer 4

Your view on the international is unhappy and pathetic. The Iraq warfare replaced into nicely intentioned yet poorly carried out. US bombing did not reason the "lack of life of 500,000 children and pups," it is a bull **** statistic made up through you or one among your socialist web content. the U. S. bombing placed up-Gulf warfare replaced into in many cases defense force and aerial installations. So till the Iraqis outfitted faculties and nurseries lower than flak cannons and radar stations (they did not), your "statistic" is incorrect. As for being prosecuted, he will be prosecuted after Clinton receives prosecuted for Bosnia or Kosovo or Somalia or Sudan, and so on. now unlikely on. And the recent President, that one did not vote for the Iraq warfare because he replaced right into a STATE SENATOR on the time. If he replaced into in DC he would were a sturdy 'ol boy and obeyed his Democratic Senate administration. All in all, study a e book or a nonbiased source. Then pretend you comprehend what you're speaking about.

Answer 5

They say that is the goal. To have Iraq have it's won effedtive police and military. The problem seems to be that Bush isn't SHOWING that resolve.

If the Iraqi's did develope their own effective government with an effective police force and military, we could easily be told to get the f#$k out. Bush wouldn't like that.

Answer 6

there doing everything they can if the pelosi/reid regime would just get out of the way and let knowledgeable people who dont cater to terrorist states like syria do their jobs. honestly regarding your "opinion" of foriegn policy, i couldnt disagree with you more. a democracy as the us is and was in the revolutionary war certainly isnt built in a day year or three years. it takes time and al qaeda could care less about your or anyone elses naievete. they want you and the west dead and it boggles my mind why you and the pelosi ites cant understand that, especially after 911. its truly sad and sick that nancy pelosi and her cohorts want to abandon an emerging nation for poltical expediancy and masking the power grab of 06. i hope for the sake of the security of the united states rudy can wake up the liberal extremist regime before its too late for all of us.

Answer 7

I truly believe they don't want Iraq to stand on their own. If they did, they would set at least some kind of a timeline what objectives need to be met in order to do so. Without setting these objectives and a timeline, our occupation there can go on forever.

Answer 8

Well, that is the goal! Would you punish your baby for not being able to stand when you wanted? Iraq is an infant country and still needs time!

Answer 9

Of course the administration wants that. But the al-Maliki government is not strong enough to stand on its own....who knows how long it will stand if we leave tomorrow? 5 min?? 15 min?? You can not punish something that has not enough power to do otherwise...

Answer 10

Yes, he does, same as American citizens want our men and women out of combatting for them. Bush doesn't control the Iraqi armies readiness, they do. Can't you understand that to put your life on the line, while trying to also train to protect your country takes a heck of a lot of time? Even Jesus Christ himself got killed trying to love, and protect his people from harm, and death. FFS! Give the poor people some damn time to learn! Our soldiers WANT to help them! It isn't up to you!