When are we going to realise that getting out of Iraq completely is the only workable solution?

Question

Due to our causing such chaos in Iraq there will undoubtedly be massive upheaval/outright Civil War when we leave but i really do believe it's the only option. All we are doing at the moment is delaying the inevitable, whenever we leave Iraqi's are going to find their new common ground themselves and it's very likely there'll be much bloodshed.

However, currently they're having to deal with massive abuses by the occupying forces too, please read this article before replying, and weep for the Iraqi's.


http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070730/hedges

Ah, i've posted it twice as i think it's a very important issue Li'l Me and want to hear the opinions of as many people as possible.

I've answered your question, will you answer mine?? =)

Unlikely Michael, it's a well sourced article, what's your evidence?

Apologies Li'l Me, you'd answered in the other post.

Cheers, politicians need to realise they're our servants, not us theirs and obey us. =)

Cracked up laughing JR, when are you going to realiSe that realiZe is merely an Americanisation of the original English? Mug up on some more history Mister!! =)

Many excellent answers, it was really hard to choose a best answer to this question.

Answer 1

I agree. However before we go I would like to see a restructuring of Iraq. Iraq was originally three different states or "viyalets" in the Ottoman empire; Bagdad, Basra and Mosul. These three were merged by the British in 1932 creating the country of Iraq.

I think they should be seperated again. The Kurds, Sunnis and Shiites each having their own countries. The fueds between these branches (OF THE SAME RELIGION!!) have been going on for over a thousand years. It took a military dictatorship from a ruthless dictator (Saddam) to keep them from getting into a civil war. The only common thread these countries should share is the proceeds from their oil revenues which should be divided equally.

They still might war against each other, but I think there is a better chance of them not doing so if they don't have to be unified in a country that has no unity.

It's a shame George W. (the worst president in American history according to my 92 year old grandfather) had to lie to the world to fight an unwinnable war. All because he felt his daddy didn't finish the job with the last war. His father was actually smart not to take Saddam out, we could have done so without any problems. Hell we already had the personel and equipment over there. George Sr. decided not to do so because he knew what the result would be. The results that we are seeing today.

Answer 2

I'm sorry, Matt D, but your answer made me laugh. You asked whether we consider police arresting criminals as causing chaos; clearly we don't since that's what they're supposed to do.
It's a justified act.

The invasion in Iraq, on the other hand, isn't justified at all. In fact, it's almost as if people have forgotten the reason the invasion happened in the first place. First because the Bush administration felt that 9/11 and Al-Qaeda were somehow linked to Iraq, then it changed to a 'weapons of mass destruction' myth (even though the CIA warned Bush that there was no credible evidence suggesting it), and then it changed yet again to removing Saddam the tyrant! Why now? After Saddam had been in power for so many years, why did the US feel that now was the time to take Saddam out? Did it have any link to what was happening to oil prices at the time?

And secondly, Matt, this chaos is a direct result of the invasion. True, Saddam has been removed, but that is the only good thing that has come out of it. The country is in ruins. And the situation isn't getting better. The sad truth is that this is a disaster.

Although Saddam was an evil tyrant who deserved to die, he did at least kill terrorists. Now, Iraq is a breeding ground for terrorists and the invasion has been nothing but a recruitment boost for them - they can launch it as propaganda against what they call the 'evil American threat' and more people will be willing to listen to their fascist beliefs. At the same time, the West will continue to believe that these views are common against Muslim people, even the moderate groups, and the division will grow. Only then will people understand that it's not only Iraq that's the issue here.
Should we leave Iraq? Hell, we shouldn't have gone there in the first place.

Answer 3

The Iraqi question is very complex. There are at least 15 sides on the issue and a billion solutions. The sides are: American Left, American Right, American Centrist, European Left, European Right, European Centrist, Baathists, Sunni, Shiite, Kurd, Turkey, Iran, Syria, Israel, and Al Qaeda.

Far too many people neglect to ask the question, "Who is deliberately targeting civilians?" The answer is foreign insurgents.

While there are always abuses, those have been handled very publicly by the military and the many of the so-called personal accounts by "soldiers" used by some media have turned out to be fabrications by people who never were in Iraq. True veterans of the Iraqi conflict who are against the war do not talk of massive abuse by their comrades but are instead against the reason for being there and/or faulty mission planning.

I think the biggest mistake by Bremer was disbanding the Iraqi Army. Those guys were already in place and could've prevented much of the violence. Instead, they became unemployed and roamed the country much like the unemployed German soldiers did after WW I.

Now, I think the solution is to finish training the Iraqi Army so they can take over because they better understand their enemies.

While a pullout is necessary, it really needs to happen on a timetable that is orderly, supported by the Iraqis, and will not leave a power vacuum.

There should be a Fatwah issued against misguided and malevolent Muslims who teach children to be suicide bombers or kill unarmed Muslims of any sect or unarmed infidels since those killings prevent those people from converting and thereby depriving Allah of more worshippers.

Those who become willing accomplices to the killing of civilians (Muslim or infidel) are to be condemned to an eternity of cohabitation with 72 toothless virgin hags.

Answer 4

The new president will most likely withdraw under "honorable conditions". I hope that the new President is not someone who supported entering the war, because then the action would be purely political.
I hate the idea of sending people into war, killing people, and then saying, "oops were sorry, we goofed."
I would sincerely like to blame GWB for getting us into this mess but I can not blame him solely, for he had 535 co conspirators plus I sincerely believe that the intelligence services failed. I think 9/11 caught the intelligence community with their pants down and they over reacted to the threat Iraq poised.

The only reason I hesitate about withdrawal is that it will be very bad for the Iraqi people and the USA. Iraq will fall into bloody chaos, which may take it beyond the borders of Iraq, the Iranian influence with the southern Shiite population, the Sunni influence with Syria and Jordan, and the Kurds in the northern part may create tensions for along time to come. But the US lacks the political will to prosecute the war and when the will is broken the game is over. We enter the field and found the opponents are not playing fair so we quit. I here Gibbon’s pen scribbling away.

I regret that there are a surprisingly large number of Iraqis that do support the US and have risked their lives to assist us. In some places things are getting better. I really will regret what will happen to those people who did assist us and those who came out to vote. I see Iraq collapsing into a Taliban like fanatical regime, with divided alliances. I see Iran becoming more powerful and the threat of a nuclear attack in the USA ever near.

Withdrawal in Iraq would mean withdrawal in Afghanistan.

But it would give us a 2 -3 year breather perhaps longer before they starter to hit back at us.

I have spent more time in the Middle East than I ever wanted to, most westerners do not comprehend the Arab mentality, and they do not have the ability to see beyond their lifestyles taking for granted the freedoms they have. They do not realize how divided the Arad’s are between religious fractions, clan & family alliances which divided them and unite them. Nor do they understand the mentality to wage a war to emplace a religious leader as sole authority between god and man.

I sincerely feel that withdrawing from Iraq will lead us to an even greater war that we are not ready to fight.

Answer 5

Getting out is NOT the "Only Workable Solution".
America did not cause the chaos in Iraq.

Iraq has been at war with the West for decades. In 1991 Iraq invaded a sovereign country (Kuwait) which was a violation of international law.
Centuries of international law and diplomacy allow for countries to support their allies in such cases.

After the defeat of Iraq by The United States which was acting on behalf of the United Nations, Iraq continued to violate the peace agreements for almost ten years.

The evidence that Iraq was continuing to work on its weapons of mass destruction programes was believed to be true in 2003.

Even Saddam claimed to have them and then would claim to not have them. The fact that he was lying is the fault of Saddam's administration.

The fact that the evidence about WMD was faulty and erroneous is only evidence of poor work by the CIA, not innocence on the part of Iraq.

President Bush's biggest failure is and was his failure to believe that many Iraqi's would not support us. No country likes to be defeated.

The fact that Iraq does not like being defeated does not make that defeat a bad or wrong thing.

Bush should have emphasized that the U.S. and its brave Allies were fighting all terror supporting activities - not just Al-Queada.

The next target should be Iran.

Answer 6

We will leave but not until the new govt has a chance to secure itself. It wouldnt be a very wise move to hand the 2nd largest oil fields in the middle east to Al Queda or Iran now would it?

What chaos are we causing over there? We're just trying to keep the country as secure as we can right now. Do you consider the police in your neighborhood arresting criminals helping to keep you safe at night as "causing chaos?"

If it descends into civil war after we leave, so be it. Probably the best strategy is to make sure the country is as united and secure as possible and that the Iraqi police can handle the job.

You may feel that a civil war is inevitable because you are a pessimist. And thats fine, we are all entitlied to our opinions. but do realize that a number of Iraqis want what we have, democracy and freedom and if they have to fight to get it, so be it.

Occupying forces of any country in any situation are a burden in themselves. But we are the good guys. When we start going town by town filling mass graves causing genocides, THEN you can label us the bad guys all you want and Id be the first to agree.

Iraq has been ugly no doubt about that, for them and us. But it can end well if both us give our best effort. If we cut and run, we fail. If they dont unite, they fail. We both have to do our parts.

Answer 7

We were suppose to help the Iraqis. Guess that changed real quick!

The only reason Bush doesn't want to leave is all the oil we are pulling out of Iraq. Just 2 supertankers from the US pull 4 Million Barrels of oil every month out of Iraq!

And to think gas was $1.46 a gallon when Bush took office!

Answer 8

I wish just pulling out completely was an option,it is not. The Government and Corporate Oil have a vested hand in all of this. We shall have watch dog forces in Iraq for as long as they have Oil. The bulk of the troops may be scattered about elsewhere, but our Big Brother mentalitied Government will have it's hand generously dipping into Iraq's pot of blood pudding. I weep for Iraq, as well as for America, we are pawns in the rich mans game.

Answer 9

Word to jrd: it that how you see things? Everything boils down to partisan politics; who's "right" and who's "wrong?"

And I'm not "scared to death" and I see no positive results.

Sunnis and Shiites have been at one another's throats for centuries, and if you seriously think that is going to change in the forseeable future, you're dreaming.

The situation needs to be monitored; no doubt about that, but our involvement and loss of lives has solved nothing.

In the same way that you cons see everything in terms of "black and white," simple-minded people in Iraq see our presence as anti-Moslem, and will continue to recruit more terrorists to fight against the "great satan."

If you just want to "help" the Iraqi people rebuild infrastructure, then spend your money in that way; not on weapons and war materials.

Answer 10

that's challenging to beat the enemy once you may't distinguish them..... i will not think of those "suicide bombers" look any distinctive than the different Iraqi civilian. The dying toll for this conflict is recommendations boggling, and the reality the the yankee people and their leaders proceed to permit this conflict to proceed is sickening. worry isn't a lifelike excuse for conflict....that's mindless to be engaged in a conflict attempting to resign people who could or will possibly not attack you..... there will be bloodshed, little doubt, yet how plenty blood ought to we proceed to have on our palms.....