Pro Withdrawal From Iraq Folks . . . . Are You Sure You Really Want That ? ... Please Read Further?

Question

I'm willing to consider your idea . .. Are you willing to consider the consequences ? And I'm not talkin about 'we leave , the terrorists come here' .
Do you realize that if we do decide to pull-out , there will most definitely be severe consequences and drastic possibilities . If/when we leave , undoubtedly we will also be put in a position where we will have to give Iran and everybody else One Stern Ultimatum . We will most likely tell Iran that if they were to make even one move towards Iraq , or continue their support of the insurgents , then we will absolutely crush them . Whatever your beliefs or desires , don't doubt for one minute that we won't . You already know that we're only an inch or two away from hittin em anyway because of their Nuclear Program .

Do you really want us to have our backs against the wall in that situation ?
Many times I wonder if you folks have given full consideration to that distinct likelihood .

Please keep rhetoric out of this . Thank you .

Are any of you first several answerers respectful or considerate of other people and their questions ? Rather than be discouraged , I'm gonna look past your foolishness and insolence .
Now , how many of you are gonna be courteous enough to give a respectful answer ?

Many of you are living in a Dream-World if you think we won't give an ultimatum . What's wrong with you people ? Really ? This isn't in any way , shape , or form a biased question . It's reality people . Is it even possible that you can be so very short-sighted to think that we won't threaten Iran ?!?!?!?

I say the rest of you insolent fools should take a look at Elway's answer . Whether I agree or not is immaterial . She gave a thoughtful answer and some of you could learn a great deal from that .

Answer 1

That's exactly why I favor the plan of leaving residual troops to protect our interests, and our interests are many. They should have several purposes - going after the many cells that Al Queda is setting up all over Iraq (Anbar for instance), protecting the borders, continuing to help train the Iraqi Army, and most importantly keeping Iran out of Iraq. If we pull out completely we're going to end up with a worse mess than we have now, and a more dangerous situation to deal with in the near future. I really feel that while we are bogged down in Baghdad policing this civil war we are not able to deal adequately with what is happening all over the rest of Iraq, not to mention Afghanistan.

Answer 2

Yes, we need to get out, not because I think going there was wrong but there has to be an end to this and I don't believe staying will make a difference. I think no one still believes we can stabilize the place. When we leave, whether it is tomorrow or 10 years from now I don't think anything will be changing except we will have killed more terrorists, which is a good thing but more locals and our more of our soldiers will have been killed. Not good. And the deficit will be so high our grandchildren children will not be able to pay it off. AS far as the stern warning, that was given in the days following 9\11. Didn't our leader tell the world that anyone sponsoring or harboring terrorists would be severely dealt with? We obviously have not followed through with that. We know Iran is training and arming terrorists. We should have attacked them already, Pakistan and Syria also. If we had done that, there were be a lot fewer insurgents coming from those countries. Just my opinion.

Answer 3

Our back is already against the wall.

We are fighting a war we cannot win. You know why we can't win it? Because as long as one, just one, mind you, person has a desire to be a terrorist, terrorism will continue. It cannot be eradicated, and to think that we can eradicate it is folly. You know who I learned that from? From our own homegrown terrorist, Tim McVeigh. He was responsible, if you recall, for the single biggest terrorist attack on American soil prior to 11 September 2001.

You know what we are accomplishing over there? We aren't winning hearts and minds. We aren't doing anything to soothe what is essentially a civil war between Sunni and Shiite factions, with us in the middle. We are creating even more anti-American sentiment. We are making sure that an entire generation of Iraqis grow up with a desire to see our downfall, by bringing the war to us. And it isn't just Iraqis, it's Muslims of many different nations. Oh, the other thing we are doing really well is taking casualties.

Don't make the mistake of thinking that I don't know what I am talking about. I know very well what I am talking about. I also know a lot about the Middle East and Islam, because that's part of my heritage. They are going to fight, and they are going to have to work it out on their own. All we are doing at this point is making it worse.

As for Iran, I see no problem with issuing them an ultimatum. They don't want to become a nuclear power so they can attack us. They want the weapons because other countries in the area have them. They aren't foolish enough to think they can attack us without paying a heavy penalty--we are still the biggest kid on the block, and we still have the most dangerous toys in our arsenal. Iran knows very well that the wrong step will reduce Persia to a radioactive ashtray for the next million years.

Apparently we didn't learn our lesson in Vietnam. We still think we can win a conflict simply because we are bigger and have good weapons. We still think that parking troops in a country indefinitely will add stability to an area. Stability? Yeah, right.

Our mistake this time is that we didn't plan very well. The US has, more than once, removed a government from power in a foreign country because we didn't want them in the driver's seat. Generally, we've at least planned it so we can set up a decent replacement. This time, we set up a power vacuum and didn't make any good, solid plans for filling it.

I want the troops withdrawn as soon as possible. I wanted them out three years ago. We can stay, and keep fighthing, and keep getting killed. Or we can withdraw, and let the Middle East sort itself out. We cannot force them to do it--they are going to have to do it on their own.

No matter how you look at it, we are in a lose/lose situation. The prudent thing to do is bring the troops back home and minimize our losses. And for those who say we will be back in a few years if we don't clean things up now? Who says we have to go back? Let them work it out on their own.

Answer 4

The big problem that many of the anti-war crowd either are ignoring, or don't understand, is that if we leave, with the division of the Kurds, Shia, and Sunni, there could be a genocide that would make Darfur look like Disneyland. It happened in Viet Nam and Cambodia after we left, and at least 3 million died. Unless we do something to stabilize Iraq first, it will happen again in Iraq. The world will react much worse, as they will see it as a result of us leaving. And all of the protesters who insist we leave, will blame President Bush, saying "how could you move the troops out and let that happen."

Answer 5

Earnest, what I want is something that is going to work. Indefinitely keeping our troops in Iraq is clearly not working.
BTW I read most of The Day of Islam. Many years ago, this would have frightened me to the point of begging President Bush to just push the damn button and flatten the whole Mid-East! Now, the fact that these people despise us and want nothing more than to see us all dead, is not new news. I agree that we should not negotiate with terrorists & that something has to be done to stabilize Iraq (the whole Mid_East!) However, our continued occupation of Iraq is obviously not the answer.

Answer 6

We can stay here (AFG) and in Iraq and obtain the stated goals, or we can leave and come back later to fight a war 100 times more deadly in about two years, either way, the USA is going to be over here, like it or not, that is the reality of it!

Answer 7

Earnest I have always been against our troop's being used to police a civil war, they have been put slap bang right in the middle of the hornets nest ie: the slums, I just wish that they would not have been used in this way, the Iraqi's themselves should have been left to fight it out in the middle of the arena, and our troop's could have been used to secure the border regions to stop the flow of insurgents coming in from all over and causing more and more mayhem. I do not want our troop's left vulnerable and exhausted physically and mentally, doing tour after tour after tour, and I believe that if we have to end up ***** slapping Iran it could be done by air attack only, and what about sending in elite unit's to take out and finish of any wanna be corpses, I do not believe that the Iraqi's deserve one more speck of blood form our brave Honorable hero's. Afghanistan is a different kettle of fish, Hamid Karzi is a staunch allie of the USA and Britain and he's asking for our help, they Iraqi's on the other hand have shown no allegiance to either USA or Britain whatsoever, so Earnest I figure that the have had enough time to get their heads out their butt's and either make it or break it.

Answer 8

You can't fully withdrawal all the troops, embassies and borders will still have to be protected.
But I think the Iraq gov't has had plenty of time to get their sh*t together. A centralized government might work giving the Kurds, Shiites and Sunnis control of their own regions.
When we leave we have to make sure not to leave behind chaos.

Answer 9

EVERYONE would like the war to be over and our troops home from Iraq. That goes without saying.

But the choice we have in the real world is not just "peace or war."

Regardless of how we got there, and how much or how little the Iraqi government is doing, al-Qaeda is a major threat and it is very active in Iraq. As is Iran. Not addressing them now does not mean that the problem won't just get worse later. I remember saying to myself in 1991, "why don't we finish the job? we'll just have to go back there again." And I feel the same way now. And if the problem gets worse over there, and we will have shown ourselves to have been unwilling to fight in the meantime, it will be much harder to address the problems there in future. Many more Americans will ultimately die because we brought the troops home now.

Yes, I believe it. Fighting now will save more lives in the long run, and withdrawing now will ultimately cost many, many more.

As for some of the other arguments for withdrawal, I would note that many of the same arguments that, in 2003, might have supported an argument NOT to intervene - the humanitarian crisis, the chaos, etc. - are today arguments which in fact lead to the conclusion that we should NOT withdraw. Think about it. And as for the argument that resentment against the US creates terrorists, think about the resentment that will be born if we LEAVE the Iraqis and let them twist in the wind after promising to help them!

I believe that many in the US just do not believe the problem of Islamist fundamentalist terrorism is all that serious. I certainly disagree, but I think that's the problem. They blame Bush for stirring up trouble, or even for inventing the terrorist threat, because it's easier to accept than the idea that we really do have a huge fight on our hands. People want to close their eyes and go back to the (perceived, illusory) idyll of the Clinton years, and they think all we need to do is withdraw from Iraq and get rid of Bush for this to happen. What utter nonsense.

And the worst of the bunch are our politicians, Democrat and Republican. They sent our troops to leave their homes, spouses, children, careers, communities, and everything else to go to Iraq. Many will never come home, and many of those who do will be missing eyes, limbs, etc. I'd say that all of them will come home profoundly changed. They are the ultimate in bravery and selflessness.

And after we ask these courageous men and women to do all that, the politicians don't even have the guts to possibly lose their cushy jobs in office! I am disgusted by these finger-in-the-wind scoundrels who are turning tail and asking to withdraw just because their re-election campaigns are coming up. As a Republican-leaning voter, I am especially disgusted at the recent Republican turncoats. Opposing the war on principle is one thing. But changing your mind for self-preservation purposes is absolutely shameful. I'd rather see Democrats win than these self-serving cowards. Again, they ask so much of our troops, and are not willing to stand up for anything themselves. They deserve our utmost scorn.

Sorry for the rant. But it needed to be said!

PS People say they support fighting al-Qaeda. But they are in Iraq! Should we tell the world that Iraq is a terrorist "safe zone"? If we're not willing to fight them there, and now, when are we willing to fight them? I now hear there is evidence of a coming attack in the US this summer. So, does al-Qaeda hit us here and get us to withdraw? Just so people can tar Bush for going into Iraq? I hear people saying they would have supported action in Afghanistan only, but frankly their actions (refusing to acknowledge who is in Iraq, and what is at stake) give me serious doubts. A war that's not a "quick win" and Bush as commander is all they need to throw in the towel. Look at the evidence of these boards, and many Democratic (and now Republican) leaders.

I fear for our future.

Answer 10

If people don't wake up and realize that the terrorists will not be satisfied with just Iraq-- they want the whole world and they won't stop just because we appease them.