Inspired by other threads, I was wondering what would happen if we just close up shop and leave Iraq. I really can’t see any benefit to the US. Yes some troops will not die in Iraq, but destabilizing that area and the possibility for a terrorist haven would surely spell more deaths in the future. Higher oil prices only hurt the poor and middle classes, yes the rich might complain about the high cost of jet fuel, but it for many it is the difference between food, warmth and fuel.
Perhaps the best thing that could happen to the US is a long drawn out civil war, and if WMD were hidden, someone there knows where they are and will use them, but at least US people won’t dead.
I really can’t see any real benefit to pulling out now, just more to lose.
How do you know that the U.S. presence itself isn’t destabilizing the area and retarding the rebuilding of Iraq? I see no reason to assume that the presence of U.S. troops is a net stabilizing force.
Civil war between the Sunnis and the Shiites, massive slaughter of innocent civilians, and the perfect breeding ground for Al Qaeda to train and deploy terrorists around the world.
Which is the same outcome if we stay 5 or 10 more years and sacrifice 5,000 more American lives on the altar of Bush’s ego before we declare victory and pull out. The current strategy has zero chance of achieving a stable, non-violent democracy. It is a fantasy, a pipe dream that conservatives cross their fingers and hope-hope-hope will bring peace (if everything goes just right, and nothing unexpected happens), but that has actually increased the violence and misery in Iraq.
—the whole point of this war --plan A --was to get rid of Saddam Hussein. -----
—Remember Bush #2 actually offered not to have any war at all, if Saddam Hussein and his sons simply exiled themselves. Meaning of course that civil war was acceptable at the time----and let the best strong man win------as long as it wasn’t Saddam Hussein.
Well-----we did that. We won the war very easily. And Saddam was captured and will probably be executed.
So plan B ----------democratizing a major mid eastern nation, being able to have our troops permanently stationed in some mid eastern nation (NOT Saudi Arabia==actual cause of 9/11)-- and controlling the 2nd largest oil reserves in the world didn’t work out as well as we thought it would. So what the hell-------you take what you can get.
This thing should have not happened, at least not when it did and w/ the total lack of planning for dealing w/ the problems after the initial invasion, but it did happen and we have to make a reasonable effort to establish an Iraqi security force before we can pull out. I too, have my doubts about the future of Iraq after we leave, but if we pull out w/o making a good faith effort to establish a working gov’t. and an adequate military/police presence, then the world will blame us for abandoning our commitment.
It is what it is and we have to deal w/ it. It’s just too bad we can’t impeach Bush and send him back to Texas in shame.
Well I don’t know, but just like you I assume. Part of the mission of the US forces is to stabilize the new Iraq, I would assume that this would tend towards them help stabilize that area but it is not a sure thing.
Are you suggesting if we left things would get better there?
OK Fear Itself I think I am finally understanding you. You don’t think a stable self gov’t is possiable for Iraq under current circumstances, so lets just let the whole place go to hell, because it’s going to happen anyway - we can only pospone it by the sacfrice of US lives.
Under this logic then we should pull out if we have no interest in a stable Iraq, which would be the case if it weren’t for oil, and yes I would argue that oil is worth fighting and dieing for as low cost energy saves lifes and betters lives.
Let me give you a big clue, liberals DON’T understand conservatives, the thought process is so different that they might well be on different worlds in different universes. To fill you in conservatives expect that a stable Iraq can form and has a good shot at forming, there is no crossing their fingers, it is the expected outcome, though most realize it is not the only possiable outcome. They have confidence in the ability of the Iraqi people and know that they are capable of it.
There’s an old saying in Tennessee – I know it’s in Texas, probably in Tennessee – that says, fool me once, shame on – shame on you. Fool me – you can’t get fooled again.
I have a very big interest in a stable Iraq, I just don’t think Bush has the diplomatic skill to accomplish it. A stable Iraq will never be won from the barrel of a gun, it will take the meaningful involvement of all the countries in the Middle East, as well as Europe and the rest of the major powers in the world. Bush just doesn’t have the chops to pull it off. He sees all problems in terms of a military solution that must be imposed on the unwilling. Chaos will reign until someone who can form a real coalition and broker a political solution is elected to the White House. Until then, you are living in denial.
I would have predicted as much. So long as you can get cheap gas, you don’t care how many young men and women die for your convenience. That is despicable, but no less than I expected from you.
Your belief in the future impossibility of a stable Iraq is so absolute it nears a religious conviction. And you’re not even willing to give Iraqis the small doubt you might have or the offhand chance that your own predictions might somewhat be wrong. No on the contrary you propose leaving them to their destiny of “civil war” and “massive slaughter of innocent civilians” on the basis of your own dogmatic faith. For a man throwing around terms like “despicable” this really is chutzpah.
So long as there remain just a slight chance that it might result in a stable Iraq, that is something worth fighting for. The only reason for wanting to leave now, is if you see it as absolutely 100% certain this is going to end bad no matter what is done. I just don’t see wherefrom anyone could have such a firm conviction.
First, because it already is bad, and I see no reason for it to get better. Second, Bush is involved, and anything he touches turns into disaster - he’s Reverse Midas.
I will assume this is just a cheap shot. Yes I do enjoy low jet fuel prices, but that is not the issue here, we are talking about the people who have to heat their homes and can barely make ends meet, senior citizens who must choose between heat, food and medicine and have been found frozen to death in their homes, the middle class being able to better their lives, moving to more desirable places for their families by being able to commute longer to work. Low fuel prices benefit us as a country, and is progressive helping the poorest the most.
I’m curious if you’re familar with the idea of cost-benefit analysis. How about Pyrrhic victory?
If there were an 80% chance that another 1000 lives would bring about a stable, democratic Iraq, I’d be a lot more optimistic. If there were a 10% chance of the same, I don’t think it’s worth it.
Right now, it seems closer to 10% then 80%, in my mind. And that the costs aren’t worth the supposed benefits at this point.
Um, far from a haven, camps were there before the invasion and there after.
What do you mean raise the price? Please explain to me how this is possiable w/ a commodity? (hint: it isn’t, unless you stop selling)
It is quite obvoius that S.H. had and used them, it is quite obvoius that Bill Clinton and John Kerry warned us about SH’s WMD’s. It is quite obvious that you are assuming facts not in evidence - point not conceded
Seeds of democracy in the middle east, end of the food for oil scandle where France and Germany benifited by shipping spoiled food and getting oil below market prices, preventing a civil war where many will die, perhaps with those WMD’s that we all know are there
Well I wouldn’t be that hard on Fear Itself as he just things W is not capable of it. I do think its despicable and racist that some poeple assume that the Iraqi people are not (smart, good) enough to be able to form a democracy.
Yes but the lib’s would never let us claim our land we won, so we have to set up this new gov’t, sort of like catch and release and we have to make sure that the fish can make it on it’s own, even if it means we have to pay to send it to the vet.
