NationStates Jolt Archive

I was generally of the opinion that leaving Iraq now wouldn't really help.

But I have found myself wondering in recent days.
Afghanistan desperately needs more troops - and whether America can or wants to provide them while stuck in Iraq is questionable. And taking the focus from Iraq and towards the Pakistan/Afghanistan area can only be a good thing.
The violence in Iraq has on a whole been on a trend of getting worse while the US troops were there.
Of course resistance movements and Islamist terrorist groups will find it easier to recruit new people while foreign invaders are in the country. The government of Iraq is the only faction that could hope to make peace with the insurgents, there is no way in hell that the US could make this peace happen, and while they're there, they remain one of the biggest obstacles to it.
The French cut and ran from Algeria from example, and I'd say that it isn't the worst country in the world right now (though it does have its problems).
Iran is loving this every minute of every day. While the Americans are in Iraq, they have a potential frontline right across the border. Not only that - while the troops are there and the Iraqi government lacks credibility, the Iranians can use Shi'ite NGOs that enjoy more trust to exercise power, even though the Iraqis normally aren't too fond of the Iranians.
Believe it or not, but the Iraq War does make people angry. It does make it easier for recruits to get people in the West, and those guys are the actual terrorist threat here. That is not to say that we should be avoiding offending anyone at any cost...but do we have to make it quite as easy to make it all look like it is a new crusade?
What is the realistic best case scenario? I mean, would what is to be gained really outweigh what is to be lost?
And finally...I'm pretty sure that American policy makers have learned a lesson out of the Iraq invasion. Unilateralism and fantasies of global salvation are bound to fail. Armed with that realisation, US foreign policy is again the most important tool the West has to deal with this world that is moving back to a pre-WWI like look to it. I mean, imagine North Korea and Iran - there is no way those two would have acted the way they did if the US wasn't tied up in Iraq. At the moment, the US is hurting the West's efforts more than it is helping.
And I didn't even mention the Americans who are dying now that wouldn't have to die otherwise. Or more importantly, all those that get wounded...because that number is much more substantial and certainly warrants comparisons with the Soviet adventure holiday in Afghanistan.

http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/spiegel/0,1518,436607,00.html
"Victory Would be a Fata Morgana"
Former US National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski discusses the errors committed by the Bush administration in its war on terror, the disastrous campaign in Iraq, and the risks of a global uprising against inequality.

http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/spiegel/0,1518,436560,00.html
Mission Impossible
After the Warsaw Pact fell apart, Americans felt safer than ever. Jolted by 9/11, US President Bush and his advisors resolved to deter any future attacks. But ousting Saddam Hussein only put Iraq on the brink of civil war and exposed the vulnerability of the world's only superpower.

So what do you think? Let's try to keep it civil, and not talk about the justification for going there in the first place - it was crap, but it happened. Now we have to deal with it.

And finally...I'm pretty sure that American policy makers have learned a lesson out of the Iraq invasion.
Really? I wouldn't hold my breath...

Really? I wouldn't hold my breath...
Just listen to all the major figures before the war and after. Look at the way they are dealing with Iran, the way they reacted to the whole Lebanon thing (namely: not at all).

And you'll see that even more once the next administration comes in and will do their level best to not look like Bush.

Just listen to all the major figures before the war and after. Look at the way they are dealing with Iran, the way they reacted to the whole Lebanon thing (namely: not at all).

And you'll see that even more once the next administration comes in and will do their level best to not look like Bush.

What will we do after the war is over?

Prepare for the next one.

the way (US) reacted to the whole Lebanon thing.sending zhitloads of Weapons to Israel..

at one point a US plane was refused landing on a UK Airport.. UK authorities got info about the cargo Planes going to Israel .. (delivering weapons into a WarZone)

Just listen to all the major figures before the war and after. Look at the way they are dealing with Iran, the way they reacted to the whole Lebanon thing (namely: not at all).

They're not dealing with Iran via military means because.... they simply can't afford the manpower. Simple as that- nothing to do with 'wising up'.

Rumsfeld has stayed in his position for far too long considering he made a balls up of Iraq- the reluctance to hold him accountable by his superiors, to me, shows they haven't learned (or refuse to learn) a damn thing.


And you'll see that even more once the next administration comes in and will do their level best to not look like Bush.
You're assuming the next administration would be either Democrat or a less 'extreme' Republican?

Afghanistan desperately needs more troops - and whether America can or wants to provide them while stuck in Iraq is questionable. And taking the focus from Iraq and towards the Pakistan/Afghanistan area can only be a good thing.

Well, both areas desperately need troops. Afghanistan is regressing into a level of tribal warfare and unfettered insurgency, yet the same thing is happening in Iraq. I think that the major emphasis should be put on Iraq, as the US is the only force there that can effectively keep the peace, while NATO troops are stationed in Afghanistan. It's as much their problem as it is ours, but Iraq is solely our problem.

The violence in Iraq has on a whole been on a trend of getting worse while the US troops were there.

Correlation does not equal casaution. A more accurate statement would be: the violence has been increasing despite a significant US troops presence.

Of course resistance movements and Islamist terrorist groups will find it easier to recruit new people while foreign invaders are in the country. The government of Iraq is the only faction that could hope to make peace with the insurgents, there is no way in hell that the US could make this peace happen, and while they're there, they remain one of the biggest obstacles to it.

The insurgency has almost completely fizzled out. It has now been replaced by sectarian warfare for the most part -- sure, people will still take potshots at US soldiers, but there is no more Fallujah -- no organized insurgency. Although it may be easier to recruit for such terrorist groups, you have to remember that the majority of the Iraqi people do not support these groups and wish to be provided peace and security. US troops are the only thing than can bring them that until Iraqi troops are trained and ready. There is no way that any Iraqi government will be able to make peace with all the sects unless it has a very capable military force.

The French cut and ran from Algeria from example, and I'd say that it isn't the worst country in the world right now (though it does have its problems).

The French lost the Algerian war of independence, which was being fought against the French by an organized insurgency. It was not a war among various Algerian factions. As such, it did not hurt the country that much to cut and run.

Iran is loving this every minute of every day. While the Americans are in Iraq, they have a potential frontline right across the border. Not only that - while the troops are there and the Iraqi government lacks credibility, the Iranians can use Shi'ite NGOs that enjoy more trust to exercise power, even though the Iraqis normally aren't too fond of the Iranians.

Yes, I regret that too. However, they're next on our hit list. After we clear up the situation in Iraq, we'll see who has the last laugh. Iran loves stirring up the sectarian tensions, but there is no way to stop this short of war with Iran. The only thing we can do is prevent them from succeeding.

What is the realistic best case scenario? I mean, would what is to be gained really outweigh what is to be lost?

The Iraqi army will be able to take care of security and the civil "war" will stop. That means that 100+ lives a day will be saved -- that's a very large benefit which easily outweighs the cost.

You're assuming the next administration would be either Democrat or a less 'extreme' Republican?
I'm 'assuming' that today most Americans aren't fans of the whole Iraq business, and any government that wants to be popular wants to convey to the people that it isn't likely to go down the same road.

Just be rational everyone, let's not make this one big anti- vs pro-American rant again.

Yes. Get out. Now.

A failed policy is a failed policy. More of the same will mean more of the same.

A failed policy is a failed policy. More of the same will mean more of the same.

Excellent usage of the reflexive property means excellent usage of the reflexive property.

I'm 'assuming' that today most Americans aren't fans of the whole Iraq business, and any government that wants to be popular wants to convey to the people that it isn't likely to go down the same road.
People said the same thing at the last election too. *shrug* Come election time in 2 years, I feel Iraq won't make that much of a difference. Congressional maybe, Presidential- no.

Just be rational everyone, let's not make this one big anti- vs pro-American rant again.
I'm not.

Begoner21;11674143']Correlation does not equal casaution.
I didn't imply anything other than the fact that people are dying while US troops are there. Whether or not more people will die is a matter of contention.

People said the same thing at the last election too.
And, didn't the administration turn down its rhetoric massively?

I mean, they're already doing everything they can to find a way to get out while being able to claim some sort of victory...they already recognise that "winning against the terrorists" can't be the goal, now they're aiming for training Iraqis to keep fighting, allowing them to get the hell out.

Begoner21;11674161']Excellent usage of the reflexive property means excellent usage of the reflexive property.

Shame that the usage of that property seems increasingly rare among those who believe that continued application of a bad policy will somehow, this time, change things.

dp

Sadly, The US needs to stick with its commitment and stay in Iraq and bring about stability, security, and democracy. Abandoning Iraq now leads to two things, Iran invading and expanding its territory, or isamic extremists seizing control...

I mean, they're already doing everything they can to find a way to get out while being able to claim some sort of victory....We won the Vietnam War.. remember? ;)

We won the Vietnam War.. remember? ;)

What do you mean we?

You don't come across as being from here.

We won the Vietnam War.. remember? ;)

We did? :eek:

We did? :eek:yeah man.. we killed like a zillion commie peasants.. :mp5: :sniper: :mp5: :mp5:

We totally pwned their asses.. it was awesome man.. Massive sarcasm, but you already know that.. rigth?

yeah man.. we killed like a zillion commie peasants.. :mp5: :sniper: :mp5: :mp5:

We totally pwned their asses.. it was awesome man.. Massive sarcasm, but you already know that.. rigth?

won all the battles, lost the war.

damn you guerilla tactics...

You don't come across as being from here. I am not from the Black forrest.. wherever that is.:D What do you mean we?we, Americans/USians or whatever you wnat to call US..

and NO I am not including you in the "we".. because I do not think you are from my country.

yeah man.. we killed like a zillion commie peasants.. :mp5: :sniper: :mp5: :mp5:

We totally pwned their asses.. it was awesome man.. Massive sarcasm, but you already know that.. rigth?

True, though they did drive us out. We killed a few million people but communism still triumphed. Hail Ho Chi Minh!

Then again we did kill a few million people... :mp5:

damn you guerilla tactics...

That and the stupidity of American military leaders and the politicians...

That and the stupidity of American military leaders and the politicians...

The blame falls mostly on the shoulders of Robert McNamara, though LBJ and William Westmoreland didn't help.

I am not from the Black forrest.. wherever that is.:D we, Americans/USians or whatever you wnat to call US..

and NO I am not including you in the "we".. because I do not think you are from my country.


Where you from lad?

Where you from lad?what? you want my adress, phone number , Zip code and SSN ?

Sadly, The US needs to stick with its commitment and stay in Iraq and bring about stability, security, and democracy. Abandoning Iraq now leads to two things, Iran invading and expanding its territory, or isamic extremists seizing control...

i agree,or even possibly worse...a horrible civil war with thousands upon thousands of innocents killed in a power struggle.

as much as i was against the war,and do agree we need more troops in afganistan(that should have been dealt with completely..first)we have to at least get their security forces somewhat on their feet,then pull back to quick responce bases to aid the iraqi's,and get the hell off their streets.

*snip*

Very brilliantly put, Neu Leonstein. You have earned my full respect. :)

I hope you like cookies.

We won the Vietnam War.. remember? ;)

Yes and no.

Won militarily? Yes.

Achieved our stated objectives? No.

Therefore, you could either say we "won" or "lost," and in either case, you would be partially right.

Yes. Get out. Now.

A failed policy is a failed policy. More of the same will mean more of the same.

*gives Soheran a humongous, home-made cookie*

Enjoy. ;)

Really? I wouldn't hold my breath...

Nor would I.

*gives Soheran a humongous, home-made cookie*

Enjoy. ;)

I will... after all, I know I have little chance of earning one from you in certain other threads. ;)

Just out of curiosity, you are a reincarnation of Maghda, yes?

I will... after all, I know I have little chance of earning one from you in certain other threads. ;)

Just out of curiosity, you are a reincarnation of Maghda, yes?

Ooh, good guess, but...no.

Of course the US should pull out. Its not like anything great is going to happen if they stay. Just a civil they will get in the middle of.

A US pullout will result in Arab Sunni countries like Syria, Jordan, KSA etc and Shi'ite Iran going to a full scale war to control Iraq. It will result in more mayhem than what is happening now.

what? you want my adress, phone number , Zip code and SSN ?

Country and or State or Provence.

A US pullout will result in Arab Sunni countries like Syria, Jordan, KSA etc and Shi'ite Iran going to a full scale war to control Iraq. It will result in more mayhem than what is happening now.

Syria and Iran fighting?

Doesn't sound like a bad idea to me...except for the fact that Iraqis would be caught in the middle.

I was generally of the opinion that leaving Iraq now wouldn't really help.

But I have found myself wondering in recent days.
Afghanistan desperately needs more troops - and whether America can or wants to provide them while stuck in Iraq is questionable. And taking the focus from Iraq and towards the Pakistan/Afghanistan area can only be a good thing.
The violence in Iraq has on a whole been on a trend of getting worse while the US troops were there.
Of course resistance movements and Islamist terrorist groups will find it easier to recruit new people while foreign invaders are in the country. The government of Iraq is the only faction that could hope to make peace with the insurgents, there is no way in hell that the US could make this peace happen, and while they're there, they remain one of the biggest obstacles to it.
The French cut and ran from Algeria from example, and I'd say that it isn't the worst country in the world right now (though it does have its problems).
Iran is loving this every minute of every day. While the Americans are in Iraq, they have a potential frontline right across the border. Not only that - while the troops are there and the Iraqi government lacks credibility, the Iranians can use Shi'ite NGOs that enjoy more trust to exercise power, even though the Iraqis normally aren't too fond of the Iranians.
Believe it or not, but the Iraq War does make people angry. It does make it easier for recruits to get people in the West, and those guys are the actual terrorist threat here. That is not to say that we should be avoiding offending anyone at any cost...but do we have to make it quite as easy to make it all look like it is a new crusade?
What is the realistic best case scenario? I mean, would what is to be gained really outweigh what is to be lost?
And finally...I'm pretty sure that American policy makers have learned a lesson out of the Iraq invasion. Unilateralism and fantasies of global salvation are bound to fail. Armed with that realisation, US foreign policy is again the most important tool the West has to deal with this world that is moving back to a pre-WWI like look to it. I mean, imagine North Korea and Iran - there is no way those two would have acted the way they did if the US wasn't tied up in Iraq. At the moment, the US is hurting the West's efforts more than it is helping.
And I didn't even mention the Americans who are dying now that wouldn't have to die otherwise. Or more importantly, all those that get wounded...because that number is much more substantial and certainly warrants comparisons with the Soviet adventure holiday in Afghanistan.

http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/spiegel/0,1518,436607,00.html


http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/spiegel/0,1518,436560,00.html


So what do you think? Let's try to keep it civil, and not talk about the justification for going there in the first place - it was crap, but it happened. Now we have to deal with it.

This piece (http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/09/06/opinion/edkurtzer.php) almost perfectly sums up my thoughts on why we need to leave.

A US pullout will result in Arab Sunni countries like Syria, Jordan, KSA etc and Shi'ite Iran going to a full scale war to control Iraq. It will result in more mayhem than what is happening now.

I find this kind of unlikely. We can just point out how irritated we would be if they tried such a thing. Doesn't mean that they wouldn't give some covert support to a faction in Iraq however.

Country I told you already.. what is the point of you asking me questions.. if you do no read the answers. and... or State or Provence.I am not giving you my Provence.. you Fcking Prvert :D :D :p :D