We got Saddam, there are no WMDs, Iraq has a democratically elected government (more or less), we are torturing people, we are massacring small neighborhoods, we are raping and killing families and most of the people shooting at us in Iraq would stop shooting at us if we weren’t in Iraq anymore? Aren’t we at the point where we are doing more harm than good by being in Iraq?
**Why are we still in Iraq? **
I believe that it is for the frequent flier miles.
Hard to argue with that logic.
I agree with your sentiments generally, but I worry that by pulling out, a huge instability would result.
We should never have started this stupid, destructive, moronic war in the first place.
I believe the controlling principle is:
You break it, you bought it.
-Wholesale production of mini black holes which, orbiting the earth, will cast us screaming through their event horizons, and into the unknown terrors of the fifth dimension.
Cthulu awaits?
If more people don’t die, then the earlier deaths of other people will have been in vain.
I think you see where this is going.
So long as we stay, they can still hope for a miracle. Withdrawal means defeat. Its not so much about avoiding defeat as avoiding admitting it.
I am familiar with the idea but that doesn’t mean that we are inextricably tied to Iraq forever, does it? There must be some condition under which we can leave, isn’t there? We have removed a tyrant; we have determined that they are not (and never were) a threat to our security; we have broken the back of the terrorists in Iraq; we have spent 300 billion dollars and 2500 lives on this effort; and now with the rape/murder of a 14 year old girl and the execution of her family (including a 4 year old) by a squad of U.S. soldiers (and I am amazed that people aren’t more incenced about this), don’t we at least have to consider whether we are doing more harm than good?
Charmingly naive of you to think that a few thousand deaths and random atrocities in a far-off land should count for more than avoiding the embarassing the government top brass.
I think the term you’re looking for was popularized by Tricky Dick Nixon. Does “Peace with Honor” ring any bells? Things are looking up, it only took five years for us to pull out of Vietnam after “Peace with Honor” became the catch phrase. So maybe we really are seeing the last throes…
Yeah, cause the stability we have now is great, what with the car bombs, death squads and all. 
Also, we don’t want our troops to have died in vain. Or dishonor the sacrifices of those who have yet to die.
We are still there for the same reason we conquered and devastated the place originally; because as a nation, America is irrational, amoral, greedy and cruel.
No, we have made them MUCH stronger; they weren’t there before we invaded. Now, Iraq is a giant training ground/recruiting tool/entertainment center for terrorists, and anyone else who hates and wants to kill American soldiers.
We’ve never cared; why start now ?
We’ll be there as long as the oil in the region is valuable; probably longer than I’ll be alive. We don’t care about the people we’ve killed or raped or tortured; as far as we are concerned, it is our God-given right and duty to kill and rape and torture foreigners. After all, if they were really human they’d be American.
They weren’t American; they don’t count in the eyes of true Americans.
Oops. Forgot to add the ::rolleye::
Blast! Mod fix coding, please.
That conclusion is a bit premature, isn’t it?
We can’t get out because to do so would be to admit to a big mistake. The US does not admit to mistakes. Just like we keep up an embargo on one despot for over 40 years while other despots get most favored nation treatment- failure simply cannot be admitted.
“we have broken the back of the terrorists in Iraq;”
If so, then who’s shooting at us, and why?
Who is this “we” you keep talking about you fucking scumbag? You got a mouse in your pocket?
I hate bush, I hate the war, I hate most of American foriegn policy over the years, but you are a royal fucking scumbag for trying to fit all americans individually into your hate filled fantasy world. Did I mention you are a hate filled ignorant scumbag?
Why are we still in Iraq? Sunk cost fallacy.
Wow, that’s a bit cynical. You sound like the sun hasn’t come out since we invaded Iraq.
So we want to try to extract meaning from a meaningless war, therefore we want to keep fighting until a reason for the war emerges?
I don’t know if you were being sarcastic but doesn’t the fact that they are over there wearing American uniform make them Americans?
My understanding is that the vast majority of the insurgents in Iraq consist of non-"terrorists: Shia nationalists (who shoot at us because they see us as foreign occupiers (frankly if some country sent their army to remove Bush (as much as I dislike him) and then stuck around while abducting, kidnapping, torturing, massacring, raping, murdering, I’d like to think I’d shoot at them too)); Sunni’s (who shoot at us because we installed a democratic but basically shia government); Baathists (who shoot at us because we have outlawed their political party, they can’t even get jobs but they still have all the guns from when Saddam was in power); Common thugs.
My understanding is that the “terrorists” are almost exclusively foreigners and no longer have the support of the local insurgents because they blew up that temple and it has become clear that these outside terrorists do not have Iraq’s best interests at heart.
In any event, when do we leave? Are there any benchmarks other than “when the situation on the ground merit,” don’t we at least need a definition of victory short of the elimination of all resistance?