Is Iraq really about success or failure?

Question

It seems most of the debate is based on whether what we are doing is working or not in Iraq, but is that the real debate?
Shouldn't the question be whether we should have gone in the first place, and whether we should be there at all?

Success is one measure of things, but just because an action is succesful, it doesn't make it the right action.

Answer 1

You're right. The debate should be about recovering from a failure. American troops were set up for failure the moment they were sent in to Baghdad.
They have done every thing they were asked to do...Liberate Iraq, capture Saddam. The failure was in planning this mess in the first place. By not accepting his own failure, Bush is, by proxy, placing the blame on the military

Answer 2

I'd say it's a bit late to ask whether we should be there or not... we're already there.

IMO, we still have a lotta work to do. It would be irresponsible to pull out of Iraq now, and not finish what we started.

I think we should also keep in mind that the media coverage on most recent US wars (Vietnam, Korea, Persian Gulf, etc...) weren't exactly objective; most of it was largely negative. So don't rely too much on mainstream news for your information about Iraq.

Besides, would you still be asking this question if Saddam/Iraq had attacked the United States? :-/

Answer 3

The debate about whether we should have gone there in the first place is moot - we're there and have been for 4+ years. The time for debate was BEFORE the troops were deployed to the Iraqi border, BEFORE Congress authorized the use of military force. Move on!

As for staying there, it has been widely recognized that withdrawal without having stabilized the government would be an unmitigated disaster. It's a horribly bad idea.

Answer 4

Success for the NSA/PNAC rats, who ignited this quagmire is already 100% secured - they wanted the US to build a "Mega Military Base" in the heartland of the Arabs, the biggest base ever build in the history of the world. They got it.
Now, since the work is inevitably done, they don't really care, what happens next. If Petreaus is thrown to the wolfes, like Powell, or the troops are pulled out in December, the Mega Base will be standing.
This base will cost us tax payers about 9 Trillion Dollar, the most expensive real estate in the world.
For what? Who knows? To protect the oil, Israel, imperialism, cause more problems to justify more violence, the end of us supremacy, to spread more hate, I don't know.

Answer 5

I think you are wrong in your assumptions. There is no real debate. If we could strap lie detector equipment on the Democrats and ask them their opinions about the war, most of those doing the bashing would not pass the test.

Debating whether or not we should have gone is irrelevant. You cannot change history. The goals are proper: defeat terrorists, and get Iraq back on it's feet. Anyone would have a hard time arguing against those goals.

Answer 6

May some of the rep cons will see your point. It would be nice because they keep saying he is doing the correct thing. They keep saying how the troop build up is working. I guess there not looking at the other areas of Iraq?

Right action would of been to allow the rest of the world to follow us into Afghanstan(spelling). To find them and remove them from the world so that we as a world could of stamped out terror in one blow. Thou greed and power and lies fill the white house. Its better to leave office then face the firing squad! Thou I wish the country would wake up and smell the crap that is coming out of G Bush mouth!

Answer 7

I still have not heard a specific and concise definition of "success" or "victory" for this war. And it doesn't help when the supporters of it just keep changing the paramaters (always vague ones at that) every few months and forget what they said a few months ago.

Answer 8

americans hate losing