:dubious:
Basing that mainly on comments by Vietnamese Doper Geekmustnotdie in this thread.
See here.
I’ll listen to Raddatz before Tom Hayden. She said, in the link above:
Absent genocide, I’m a pretty big fan of not interfering with other countries’ sovereignty. (One of many reasons I opposed going in.) So I have no problem pulling out and, if they wish to have a civil war, let them kill each other.
In short, I didn’t give a damn about Iraq before we invaded, and I don’t give a damn about them today.
Nothing in that quote contradicts the thesis that most of the Iraqis want U.S. troops out of their country.
While I am sympathetic to your view, and even share it to a large extent, there is the issue of a larger regional conflict ensuing if Iraq erupts into a full-blown civil war. And it would probably be one of multiple fronts: Suni Arab vs Kurd, Suni Arab vs Shi’a Arab, Shi’a Arab vs Shi’a Arab. Keeping Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Turkey out of this would be problematic, at best. Not saying it’s a sure thing that it would escalate thusly, but it needs to be considered.
Yeah, you’re right-- my bad. I misread your link the first time. I skimmed it quickly and thought Hayden was touting Maliki’s request for a timetable. I see now that he’s suspicious for the same reason Raddatz is.
Nothing in you link conclusively proves that a majority of Iraqi’s want us out of their country (immediately, in the short term, in the medium term, in the long term?) either. Nor does it prove that even if a majority DO want us out that this would necessarily mean it is the wisest thing to do in any case.
Do you think the majority is always right? Always knows what’s best? Or only a majority of IRAQI’s are always right, always know what’s best? And would that be a majority of Iraqi’s today, last year, a decade ago, etc etc?
-XT
All the polls I’ve seen have shown a clear majority of Iraqis want us out, sooner rather than later. IIRC, the timeframe is usually 6-12 months. We’ve had numerous threads on this over the years.
Well, Hayden cites to his new book, Ending the War in Iraq, where the claim is presumably documented, but I haven’t read it. Certainly conducting reliable public opinion polls, let alone fair and honest elections, is problematic under such socially chaotic circumstances. But, really, this thread is the first time I’ve seen the assumption that the Iraqi people want us gone seriously questioned. It would seem to be a no-brainer; they’ve had nothing but trouble since we got there: Over a million Iraqis dead, at least 2 million internal refugees and 2.2 million refugees abroad, etc., etc.
[shrug] One of the purported aims of this war was to bring the Iraqis democracy and self-determination. Democracy is not based on the assumption that the people are good or wise or know what is best for them; it is based on the assumption that the people are sovereign and the state should do whatever a majority of them want for that reason alone. Or, as H.L. Mencken put it, “Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.”
Isn’t that what we’ve been doing for the last five years? Seventeen years if you go back to our pre-occupation presense in the region. At what point should we admit something isn’t working?
Sure, I believe that. The point is though that the time frame varies from group to group as to WHEN they want us ‘out’.
Ok John…so, let’s say the majority of Iraqi’s DO want us out asap. I’m all for it, personally. Obama will have the mandate (if he wins) to do so. He’ll have the house and senate on his side.
Think we’ll be out of there in 6-12 months?
-XT
Not really.
IIRC Bush & Co. had no post war plan for Iraq. It was more:
Step 1: Win war in Iraq
Step 2: ???
Step 3: Profit!
Further, in all this time, I have seen no coherent solution put forward by the Bushites to resolve things there. It just seems to be a, “We’ll stay as long as necessary and hope things work out” kind of plan.
See post #16. I was just responding to your question BG’s statement that Iraqi people want us out. They do. It’s an important consideration in what we do, but it’s not the only consideration. When they elect a government that asks us to leave, then it will be the only consideration.
Agreed. Fervently.
-XT
Oh, no, it’s even worse than that. They had several incompatible plans.
:smack: Post #15. 
…and YOUR position is predicated on an assumption: that the current US effort in Iraq is the absolute maximum that can be put forth.
The United States currently has a mere 141,000 troops in Iraq. Out of 1,426,713 active duty servicemen in total, and with over 2 million male citizens reaching military age every year. The home economy has not been placed on a war footing, domestic consumption has not been significantly affected and conscription has not been instituted. 4,000 odd fatalities in 5 years is minuscule by any standard of modern warfare.
There is no reason why the US cannot triple or quadruple troop levels in Iraq, while vastly increasing expenditures for both operations and reconstruction. It can be just as easily argued that the lack of progress to date has been due to insufficient troop levels and effort.
I wish. Once he’s in, he’s gonna start worrying about his own legacy and how a post-withdrawal civil war will affect his re-election prospects in 2012. Maybe he’ll do it anyway, though. “Americans can always be counted on to do the right thing . . . after they have exhausted all other possibilities.” – Sir Winston Churchill
:dubious: Have you noticed that (1) American military resources are stretched too thin as it is, everyone seems to agree; (2) our economy is in a recession or something pretty near; (3) there is zero popular mandate for putting our society on a “war footing”; and (4) there are less than zero good reasons for doing so?