No.
An immediate pullout? No.
A well-crafted multilateral plan, where replacement troops are installed to help keep the peace, and then we bring the war-weary troops home? Hell yeah.
Fat chance of that happening under Bush, however.
Asap (uk)
Would the OP care to place some sort of explanation on WHEN or under what circumstances the troops should or should not come home?
“Should the troops come home ASAP/in the next few weeks/before Christmas?”
If that were the OP’s desired question, then I can see very little need for debate or explanation.
Depending on the ‘when’ makes a difference in my own answer. If the ‘when’ is ‘now’ then definitely my answer is no. If the ‘when’ is when there is a stable Iraq (or some similar facimile there of) then my answer is yes. If its sometime in between, then my answer is a definitive…maybe.
Hope that helps for the poll. BTW, isn’t there a poll function on this board?? I know some boards have them and they work pretty well.
-XT
Nope. No poll function.
No, USA.
This war is going to happen whether it’s in Iraq or not. Looking back on WWII, I would not expect a lot of help from other countries. The United States was not a world power at the time and had to be dragged kicking and screaming into the war. There was very little support for it at the beginning.
IMO, France and Spain have their own internal problems with the Catalan region as well as a growing Fundamentalist Muslim population. Russia has it’s problems with Chechnya and can’t join the fight (no money). Germany is too fractured politically to do anything. Getting a major world power to help will only happen when the problems start to hit home (as happened in the US in WWII). Waiting for that to happen means more time for the proliferation of nuclear weapons in a region that is increasingly dominated by fundamentalist influences. Considering how joyfully the enemy seeks an audience with God (via suicide–bomb) a Nuke would be the end-all religious sacrifice.
There are a number of political doctrines that could have been used for the situation in the Mid East:
- Do nothing and let the chips fall where they may hoping the US isn’t the target of another mass attack. And if attached again, anticipating greater World support (not forgetting that a single terrorist group killed thousands, almost eliminated Congress, attacked the heart of the US military, and seriously damaged the entire airline industry).
- The US could have pulled out of the region all together and let the UN handle it (knowing nothing would happen).
- The United States could have played Iraq against Iran (ala the 70’s) and let them kill each other, eventually with nukes.
- The US and it’s allies could have backed the Iraqi Shia in a coup. This would have installed yet another Fundamentalist government. Given past experiences backing OBL there is nothing that could be classified as a political success with this scenario. The Sunnis would probably be annihilated and the Kurds would have started a civil war which would then draw Turkey into it. The US would have been blamed for the civil war (which may yet come to pass if we pull out).
So again, no. I don’t see an easy way to deal with the growing cancer of religious hatred that is directed toward Western Civilization. I also don’t expect a lot of help by countries that have not been attacked on a large scale. It’s how the US behaved in WWII and it’s political human-nature to act that way.
JM2C. Not looking for a debate, just explaining my viewpoint.
No. We made the mess, if we leave now it will be a bloodbath.
No (UK)
Wish we could tho.
No.
Note: this is a different question than “should they have been there in the first place?” But given the realities as they are today, bringing the troops home would be catastrophic in almost every way. Setting a date is also a very bad idea – it tells the bad guys exactly how long they have to wait us out.
Pity that kind of thinking wasn’t in place before this stupid fucking war.
As to the OP: No.
Yes. Nothing good will come of the US occupation. The United States does not need a puppet in the Middle East.
Doh! I meant yes but to be replaced with a Muslim contingent. Those people still need help now that the west has radicalised a large section of the country. White christians aren’t helping though.
Worded like that… one might imagine that they would never eventually be brought “home” 
I guess its better not to leave americans behind… even if you pullout only in 2012 ! (I’m not american or british… so I’m out of here…)
Yes.
No way in hell. The war and subsequent invasion were catastrophically stupid and will probably blow up in our faces but leaving would even be worse. It’s better to appear wrong and strong then wrong and weak.
We should bring our troops home once we catch Saddam.
Oh, wait…
Ok. We should bring our troops home once they hold democratic elections.
Oh, wait…
Oh, God, I dunno. I really don’t want to see more Americans die, but I don’t want the war to have been a total waste. Since we preemptively invaded the country, we have an obligation to see it into an orderly state. Of course, the question then becomes, “How can a US presence bring about order in Iraq?” You got me.
This was why I opposed the war in the first place: I knew we would have to make these tough decisions, and didn’t see much hope for a happy ending. I still don’t.
Nope. The only thing I could see coming out of that is more violence, which is not what that region needs right now.
Yes. Now. And bring them home from all the other places as well.