"If we leave Iraq now, there'll be a bloodbath!" SO WHAT?

Question

By now the majority of Americans have figured out that the whole Iraq thing is a fiasco, and wish to be through with it. One thing keeping us there is fear that once we leave, the whole place will turn to chaos and more killing. But why should we care?

The Shiites and the Sunnis WANT to have it out. I say, LET THEM! Why should we put ourselves in the middle of it? The Iraqi people are not worth a single drop of American blood.

Worst case analysis: Shiites kill Sunnis, Sunnis kill Shiites. BOTH hate us, so wouldn't we be better off with fewer of them, if they killed each other and not us?

Better case analysis: Once we leave, there'll be no reason for a nationalist insurgency, so the violence will DECREASE. They could step back from sectarian civil war and come to some sort of modus vivendi, without either one being accused of being a US puppet or sellout.

But to quote the Moody Blues (1965)|: "Go Now!"

Another thing they say to keep us in the quagmire is: "If we leave, they'll follow". Sunni insurgents will NOT come here, they just want us gone! Shiite Death Squads will NOT come here, they just want to get revenge on Sunnis and consolidate their power.

Answer 1

Since it has never been stated as policy that we are in Iraq to protect anybody Then you are right. Our presence is antagonizing the situation. What happened to "Mission Accomplished"? The idea that we are protecting America by being in Iraq is ludicrous. No one is going to invade the US. And we have terror programs already in place to help prevent sneaks. Bring the soldiers home and use 20% of the war funds to increase protection at our borders and we have no problems. Use the other 80% to pay for healthcare, education and other "American" interests.

Answer 2

Actually, I agree with Tinkerbell. The chance of a bloodbath is made more likely by every action of the US in Iraq. I would go so far as to say that it is being done purposely and have the logic to back it up, but you can easily find very long explanations on that subject in one of my answers yesterday. The point is that a blood bath is not likely in a country that has a healthy civil society.
The more civil society erodes in Iraq, the more likely violence will continue. Civil society is somewhat strong in Iraq and confidence in the government is relatively high. If the US leaves, chances are sectarian grievances will slowly switch forum from the streets to parliament.
Right now, there is one person who is working towards a peaceful democratic Iraq. His name is Moqtada Al Sadr and if you look up what he said today, and has been saying for some months now, you will be astonished. After the Askariya Mosque was bombed today he called for Shi'a restraint. He wants a peaceful solution to the occupation. He wants a sovereign Iraq.
Remember that an excuse to remain in Viet Nam was that a blood bath would ensue after withdrawal. Turns out that the bloodbath did occur, but it was not North against South. It was in Cambodia, where thanks to the US bombing and arming of thugs, Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge rose to power unopposed. They murdered about a million ethnic Vietnamese.
Mark my words. The US leaves and violence will end soon. IF the US continues its escalation of air attacks, or succeeds killing Al Sadr, there will be a genocide.
Iraqis are not crazy. They listen to their respected leaders. The Shi'a listen to the Ayatollah Al Sistani and Cleric Al Sadr. Sunnis are starting to organize behind the Sadr coalition. Please stop your government from effectively causing another genocide. As long as the US is in Iraq, there will be a civil war there. The same applies to the US presence in Lebanon, where your government fund Sunni militias with ties to Al Qaeda and Palestine, where your government is arming Fatah.

Answer 3

It is very sad and we should all feel remorse for what our government has brought on the poor everyday citizens of Iraq. Yes, the bloodshed will continue whether we stay or leave. We have provided the opportunity for the hate and mistrust between the sectarian groups to flourish. We have helped destabilize the region, since other countries have ties to one side or the other and will find someway to support those they are aligned with.

There is no good answer at this point. The American people are complicit in whatever tragedy results because they allowed this Administration to follow through with their invasion plans without understanding the history of the area and understanding what the aftermath would be.

It is time to leave, watch the bloodbath, and then let the American taxpayers pay through the nose for decades to rebuild what is left as remorse for what we created.

Answer 4

Actually the Sunnis and the Shiites probably DON'T want to have it out. You seem to be missing the fact that under strongman Hussein, they were not out on the streets killing one another every day. It was no bucket of roses, for certain, but it was our tearing down Hussein's powerhold that caused this situation to escalate.

In fact, since we installed out little puppet government there, the country has reverted to the old hatreds, women are less free, and there seem to be a lot of disaffected ex-soldiers, some trained by us, out causing chaos.

I would imagine if we left, and if we had the sense not to leave behind our little black agencies pulling strings, the situation would again find equilibrium under a secular dictator.

Sometimes dictatorship is the best answer. Herr Bush seems to think so here on the home front... so why not apply that logic elsewhere?

Answer 5

But on the contrary...I think that if the foreign troops would pull out things are going to get much better there...As you said it "there'll be no reason for a nationalist insurgency"...People could reconstruct their lives after the military occupation would be over...
And allow me to remind you that none of this would have happened if your dear president could actually think...It's his fault that right now in Iraq there is a civil war and that Iraq had become a training camp for terrorists...

Answer 6

Here's the thing: "Georgie's" little adventure in Iraq has only served to make things WORSE in the Middle East! If we stay in Iraq, there will be bloodshed. If we leave Iraq, there will be bloodshed. See the difference!?!?

What we must carefully watch in the near term is whether or not the monsters in this administration can ratchet up the fear in their base enough to allow them to attack Iran which is what they want so badly to do. If that happens, we're in WWIII.

Answer 7

Before Iraq became a country, There were ethnic and religous fighting among themselves and the other groups. The only time Iraq ever had any prosperity if you can call it that is when the US supported Saddam. So sad, but it will always continue regardless of US occupation or not.

Answer 8

People in that region have been at one anothers' throats for centuries.

Plus, if we're really not there because of the oil, what do we care? Right?

Does anyone in their right mind think that we can totally (or at least effectively) end either their mutual animosity or their hatred about the US?

Get out, beef up our security at our coastal ports, and let 'em eat sand and cook over camel dung.

Answer 9

Those who favor the war in Iraq act like there is no bloodshed and never has been but will be lots of it if we leave. Actually it will be no different the blood letting will continue except it won't be American blood that is being shed.

Answer 10

exactly going to iraq in the first place was a big mistake we're barely doing anything. its not a war between us and the iraquis its a war between the shiites and the sunnis and we're just making it worse by being in the middle of it