Iraq war debate?

Question

my law studies class is having a debate on the iraq war with another class whether we are for or against congress passing a law to leave irq. My class was assigned against and were told to come up with question to hurt the other side and help us. I need ideas

Answer 1

Background...

You have to understand that most of the people alive in the United States today don't know anything about the military. And they know less about war. Most have grown up after Vietnam. All they ever heard was that those in the military are war mongers, that war is evil, and that we need to establish an isolationist policy. They elect people who cut our military back to less than is minimally necessary to take care of ourselves. The military budgets have been cut. Their equipment has been allowed to age. Their bases have been closed. Their benefits have been taken away..

Then along comes 9/11. People say hit back. For 12 years congress had been after the administration to finish what we started in Desert Storm. We went into Afghanistan and Iraq.http://www.c-span.org/resources/pdf/hjres114.pdf

Apparently every intelligence agency with interest in the area was unaware of the cockroaches hiding in the woodwork, afraid of Hussein. Apparently everybody thought that once Hussein was deposed, there would be dancing in the streets, the US would help build their infrastructure, train their army, and show them how to set up their own form of government so they could govern themselves. We though all the people would like that. Apparently, we were wrong.


Against immediate withdrawal.

To believe that immediate withdrawal will stop the terrorism is naive. It demonstrates a total lack of understanding of the enemy and his tactics.

The enemy resorts to terrorism (attacking non-combatants, public torture and execution by beheading and disembowelment) strictly for the terror it causes.. When we eventually leave, if they any of their cadre standing, you will hear two things. (1) "We won. We drove the cowardly Americans from our soil. We are here. They are not. What more proof do you need?" (2) "Remember what we were able to do to you when the Americans were here to protect you? Well, they're not here to protect you anymore. This is our country now."

To believe that he Iraqi people should fight their own battles is probably correct, but to withdraw troops to force them to do so is also naive, and displays an ignorance of the culture.

10 years ago, they had no rights... no freedoms. Nobody even remembered having them. So, fighting for... or defending them was not even a thought that would occur to them. For centuries they had been under the control of dictatorial clergy. For decades they had been under the control of a dictatorial leader (Hussein). To stand up to these kinds of people was dangerous if not deadly.

Suddenly, Hussein is out of power. A few of the clergy, anxious to regain their power, fomented the insurgency. In an effort to gain support in the area, they declared it to be a "holy war" to drive out the infidels. That sort of worked until they saw that they can't engage us without heavy losses (skirmishes they lose 20 to 1: in battles they lose upwards of 50 to 1). So they attack non-combatants. (See above for how they intend to do it.) Now they blame us that they have to target non--combatants... and the world listens.


Against a publicly announced withdrawal...

To suggest for a publicly announced programmed withdrawal, serves no purpose except to inform the enemy how much longer they have to hold out.

Withdrawal of any kind t this point is militarily counter productive and would be spitting on the graves of the troops, US, our allies, and the Iraqis..

As has been stated, the Iraqi people are not ready to take over the fight. They are just getting used to the idea of having a modicum of freedom. They have finally had some say in the structure of their government. But they are not yet far enough into the 21st century to take over the fight. Some guys report that some of the Iraqi troops still close their eyes when they pull the trigger... and that's in training.


Against any withdrawal under the present circumstances...

To withdraw at this point... without a trained and equipped Iraqi Army and Police force, and a stable government to support it, would condemn the Iraqi people to the same life they led before we got there. And the new government would be angry and there would be a bloodbath. So militarily, walking out on them now would essentially be giving up to the insurgency.

If the insurgents take over, then every US casualty, and every Iraqi casualty... all those people will have died for absolutely nothing. It would be as if the French and Germans who helped the colonies during the Revolution got tired and went home. We would be part of the British Empire. And those colonists who died to gain our freedom would have died for nothing.

It is politically correct to pretend to support the troops. But, if we have learned anything from Korea and Vietnam, to do so, we have to be willing to let them finish their job.

Part of that support must be to quit hamstringing them with outmoded rules of engagement, and conventions that were designed for wars between countries and armies. Today we're not fighting an army. We are fighting street thugs. They are no more legitimate than are street gangs. And we're not fighting a country. We're fighting an ideology that says the way to debate is to kill the guys who disagree with you.

Answer 2

If you undretook the missino of world peace, the you have to complete it in full. You can not leave it half way. Whether it was proper to go to Iraw or not is a question altogether different, but once you have committed it, then there is no going back. Us will have to stay in Iraq untill the entire peace process is completed in full and peaceful domocracy is established in Iraq; elections in proper manner being helpd and a steady governmebt comes into power and stays consistant. No backing ups.

Answer 3

Ask them how many bodies were buried in Viet Nam, Laos and Cambodia when we " left with honor" after a 10 year war.

How many bodies do we need piled up in America when the terrorists, who are kinda busy right know in Iraq, move back and begin attacks in our cities?


This is whole sale slaughter and would happen in Iraq should we leave. Also, ask them what would they do if Iran slide into the drivers seat, controlled 1/3 of the worlds oil and shut off the valve to America??? Can you remember, or ask your parents, the oil embargo of the 70's where you could only buy gas on odd and even days, limited to how many gallons you could buy??

It does go deeper than this but these are just a few ideas for you to kick around.

Answer 4

Congress would be usurping the President's authority if it passed a law trying to dictated war policy. It is the responsibility of the executive branch to wage war. Congress could not possibly manage a war, with 100 opinions in the Senate and 435 opinions in the House. And none have benefit of input from the military.

Answer 5

Congress micro managing a war? Senators voting on weather a soldier can shoot or not shoot? What is the value of US involvement in the middle east? Can we survive without middle east oil? Should we be concerned with the internal affairs of other countries? Should we be an enforcer of human rights?