I am undecided on the issue of immediate withdraw from Iraq

[Selwynn]

I wanted to make this its own thread, so that I could hear some other perspectives. Let me try to reason it all out here..

These are the ways I am torn:

One one hand:
We devastated that country, therefore we're responsible for restoring it. I can consider whether our continued military occupation is worse for the the Iraqi people, but I cannot accept any scenario in which the United States is not forced to pay for rebuilding what we destroyed.

So that's the first point: even if military force should be withdrawn immediately, I cannot support anything that says the US should no longer be responsible for paying for the rebuilding of Iraq.

Still on the same hand, I am unsure of what will happen if the United States immediately and unilaterally withdraws. Will it leave a power vacuum with dooms that country to far worse civil war, destruction and suffering. Will it allow for other hard line oppressive terrorist or tyrannical regimes to come to power and once again enslave the people?

So that's the second point: is our immediate withdraw really best for the Iraqi people. That's what I care about most. We fucked them, and now I feel we are absolutely responsible for making restitution in whatever ways we can. If leaving now means dooming Iraqi people to greater suffering or worse oppression or violence, then I do not support immediate withdraw.

Now, on the other hand:
It is entirely possible that our presence there, even in the times where it is well intentioned (what I mean by that is, even when we are doing things like rebuilding or training teachers, or some of the other positive things that are trying to be done) is not helpful, does not make Iraqi people's lives more safe, or less oppressed by only makes the violence and destruction worse.

So that's the first point on this side: our military presence directly hurts the aim of making things better for the Iraqi people.

In addition, its also possible that our current administration cares so little for actually helping the Iraqi people really than we literally have no real good intentions there, little or nothing positive is even seriously initiated, and most of that is for show.

So that's the second point on this side: if our presence in Iraq really does absolutely nothing positive to rebuild or repair or improve, then we should immediately withdraw.


My own feeling at the moment are sort of like this: the United States should transition military force to a United Nations led peace keeping force made up of many nations, none of them the United States (because more countries will cooperate if we're not there). But the United States should still be responsible for the costs and struggle to repair all the horrible tragic damage that was done to the people of that country. We should have teams of builders and volunteers, not corporations awarded lucrative government contracts, but workers working through the United Nations committed to the rebuilding process.

But because I myself am torn on what I feel is a really complicated issue, I'm not as furious as some of you are that not every democrat in politics is immediately ready to say we should cut and run.

[NMDemDist2]

1. you summed up exactly the debate I have been having

with this issue.

I hope JK can bring in NATO and the UN to keep the peace and insure fair elections.

Our troops need to pull WAY back to a support role and turn over the streets to a UN or NATO force while the Iraqis come up to speed.

I also think it's critical that we have an international overseer to get our puppets out and real Iraqi leadership in

But I don't see how we can pull out right away in good conscience

[The Crazy Canadian]

2. I say pull out soon (this year) and let the chips fall where they may.

I doubt you'll get either NATO or UN forces to help out.

Pull out and let the Iraqis deal with the situation themselves, it can get messy but staying will only make the situation worse.

[Selwynn]

3. To me, that is immoral.

That is why I can't take that stance.

We destroyed the country, in doing so, we took responsibility for it. Bailing out and telling the Iraqis "good luck with that" is not my idea of Justice.

We may need to get military troops out, but somehow cutting all ties/obligations to that country is a clear wrong in my opinion.

[The Crazy Canadian]

6. I've been thinking about this issue myself for a long time.

I just posted an article by Scott Ritter, top UN weapon inspector during the '90s and he pretty much agrees that we gotta get out soon.

I was at all the anti-war protests and consider myself a pretty hardcore progressive but staying longer will only turn Iraq into another Afghanistan, like what happened to the Soviets in the 1980's.
The war is already lost, it's time to "cut and run" as they say.

[Selwynn]

10. That might be right.. I just don't know

[Karenina]

25. An "American presence"

CANNOT solve the problem, because the American presence IS THE PROBLEM.
Wisdom spoken by post-adolescents from villages in the middle of Germany this past weekend gathered around a Lagerfeuer under a clear sky replete with billions and billions of stars. I was in absolute awe as each one of these kids waited his/her turn to state an opinion to me after my group played a Konzert. :freak: :think: :freak:

[Spygame]

4. I say lets

gets some oil before we go. Let them pay for their liberation. Plus I am tired of high fuel prices.



Who's with me?

[NMDemDist2]

7. you're kidding right?

welcome to DU and enjoy your stay :hi:

[Generic Other]

8. How about you quit driving?

Welcome to DU. Hope your stay is short.

[merh]

5. Thank you for this post. You have done a wonderful job of summing up

the conflicts that the Iraq invasion has caused the party, imho.

I cannot understand how anyone can expect Kerry to come out and say we will pull out of Iraq the day I take office. This is a ludricious and unrealistic expectation. The admin that is in office now is the most secretive and diabolical admin that ever held power. To think that the admin that takes over in Jan 2005 can make definite statements relative to Iraq is expecting too much because they have no idea how screwed things are until they get in office. The rats nests that will be uncovered are numerous and frightening. They have to take office and power before they can truly determine what is in the best interests of the nation and Iraq. *&Co. have a puppet government ruling in Iraq. Not until Kerry takes office can he determine what to do and how to do it.

To say we will pull out would be like poppy saying "Read my lips, no new taxes!" It is politically suicidial to make a broad statement like that without first knowing whether or not it is possible. The 2004 election is important but just as important is the 2008 election. We cannot set ourselves for a loss in 2008, we cannot let them back in and/or give them a tool to use to get back in. False promises such as totally withdrawal would do just that. (imho)

[Still_Loves_John]

9. Great post

I'm really ambivalent about the Iraq situation too. I think that too many people on both sides oversimplify the issue, so that the only options are "God Bless George Bush! Stay in Iraq!" or "We have to completely withdraw!" but the real issue is much more complicated than that.

This is the future of an entire people we're talking about. It's criminal to let it be reduced to black and white.

[Selwynn]

11. I couldn't agree more.

[tiedye]

42. Stop being co-dependent

We are not the omnicient superpower that must decide the fate of the Iraqi people. Get out. Send money to teachers and librarians and doctors. You know the usual things that help a country. Those prisons and the bases are not to help the iraqi people they are to help Americans and Israelis.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

12. Well, the Brits wanted to stick around and "stabilize" the colonies.

But, somehow, those guys at Concord, Lexington, and Yorktown didn't think much of the idea.

For those who don't study history, our recovery from colonialism was very messy and bloody. Shaw's rebellion. Bacon's rebellion. The Whiskey rebellion. And, even the bloodiest war in our history, the Civil War was a result.

Iraq has enough troubles ahead without our "help".

[Disturbed]

14. Saddam's People are Winning the War

Saddam's People are Winning the War
by Scott Ritter


(clip) “The truth is that there never was a significant people-based opposition movement inside Iraq for the Bush administration to call on to form a government to replace Saddam. It is why the United States has instead been forced to rely on the services of individuals tainted by their association with foreign intelligence services, or drawn from opposition parties heavily infiltrated by agents of Saddam's former security services.

(clip) Regardless of the number of troops the United States puts on the ground or how long they stay there, Allawi's government is doomed to fail. The more it fails, the more it will have to rely on the United States to prop it up. The more the United States props up Allawi, the more discredited he will become in the eyes of the Iraqi people - all of which creates yet more opportunities for the Iraqi resistance to exploit.

(clip) We will suffer a decade-long nightmare that will lead to the deaths of thousands more Americans and tens of thousands of Iraqis. We will witness the creation of a viable and dangerous anti-American movement in Iraq that will one day watch as American troops unilaterally withdraw from Iraq every bit as ignominiously as Israel did from Lebanon.”

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0723-08.htm

[Rowdyboy]

13. Great analysis...Iraq is sucjh a giant cluster-f**k that I'm not sure

what we should do. I just know it's not what we're doing now.

[MattNC]

15. given its track record

and how complex any mission in Iraq is, I can't support U.S. withdrawl in exchange for UN peacekeepers. While they have had some successes, this job is merely too much for UN peacekeepers alone.

[Djinn]

32. The US wont be going anywhere for a while

whether it's under Bush OR Kerry - you don't spend that much money without getting something for it - controlling Iraq via a puppet government, controlling the finances and oil through privatising it and installing a permannent military presence would all be a little harder under a UN mandate.

The US would accept UN help but wont be handing over control and I would hope the UN isn't stupid enough to come in as window dressing only.

CAn't see the US "solving" the problem but the people in charge aren't overly concerned with the lot of the average Iraqi they had goals when they went in that had nothing to do with the suffering of the people, those havn't changed.

[MadHound]

16. The time to pull out is now!

It doesn't matter when the US pulls out of Iraq, the civil unrest and possibly war that follows is inevitable. Any government that is set up under the auspices of the US is going to be considered illegit by the people of Iraq, and with be overthrown as soon as we leave. Therefore, the arguement of the US sticking around to set up a stable government is a moot point, the US can perform no such miracle.

The longer we stay there, the greater the amount of innocents die. More innocents, more of our soldiers, more death period. The only way to alleviate this situation is for the US to get the hell out, now. Yes, we should pay for the rebuilding of Iraq, we just shouldn't participate in it.

Sticking around in Iraq in the hopes of accomplishing good is a foolish, deadly and immoral position to take. It will only result in more death and destruction, with any progress that is made being immediatlely nullified as soon as we pull out. This fact has been proven time and again over the course of history, hopefully we can learn from those lessons.

[Senior citizen]

17. I favor comparison shopping.

I always look at the price tag.

There is no way we can reduce the deficit while we continue deficit spending to wage war in Iraq.

In order to pull out of Iraq, we need what we didn't have going in: international support. And we've got it. The whole world wants us out of Iraq.

In this case we'll have a large coalition of nations whose names we know to help us get out. But sometimes you do have to cut and run. It won't happen here, but there is no disgrace in abruptly pulling out of a country without proper preparations if you abruptly attacked that country without proper preparations. It is important to take responsibility for one's actions, but there are times when you just have to say, "Sorry, my bad."

[skygazer]

18. Such a difficult subject

I didn't support going into Iraq in the first place but we ARE there and we've devastated the country. To cut and run doesn't do the Iraqi people any good - we'd just be leaving them with chaos and a power vacuum that would be taken up by the strongest contender. That wouldn't do us any good either, or the rest of the world. We've opened up a can of worms there and need to do something to stabilize it. What, though?

We've lost so much of our credibility with the Iraqi people as well as the nations of the world. This makes it that much harder to gain international assistance but I think that's part of the solution. We need to quit running the rebuilding effort as a cash cow for political cronies and take reasonable bids from competitive companies rather than use these jobs as political patronage.

It really burns me up that Bush has gotten us into this mess in the first place. To charge in there like a darn cowboy with no clear plan for the peace was insane and we, as well as the Iraqis, are paying the price. I don't know what the answer is but a big part of it, in my opinion, is our election of a new President.

[DjTj]

21. Good thoughts.

Welcome to DU! :hi:

[Walt Starr]

19. We should pull our troops out immediately and hand it over to the U.N.

Second point, we should have to pay the bill for the U.N. peacekeepers and rebuilding the country.

[stavka]

20. Maybe we should withdraw from half the country,

...or occupy on every other day.

[genius]

22. THEY DON"T WANT US TO RESTORE IT

And American kids need the money to go to college.

[Selwynn]

28. Who's "they" and what are you talking about?

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[blindpig]

23. get out

Let the UN take over. They can probably maintain order with a fraction (30-50%?) of the troops we have deployed. Haleburton & co out too. Of course, we foot the bill. Might be done in 6-12 months.

[kat21]

24. I agree -

We made a mess and it's our resonsibility to clean it up. What the best way to do that is, I don't know. I do know that we need to make sure that we get other countries involved and make sure other countries get contracts to rebuild but, IMO, they need to employ as many Iraqis as possible.

In the meantime, can we please get some adequate security for those poor truck drivers that are constantly being taken hostage?

[tiedye]

38. other counties involved?

That is a stupid idea. Don't send more people over to defend poor American profiteering truckers that shouldn't be there.
Listen to the Iraqi message. Get out Yankee come lately.
Really, sympathy for the devil has no place here. How about the Iraqi "insurgents" (read anyone opposed to brutal American armed forces) We killed over ten thousand innocent people on the bases of false information. We set up torture and rape prison where young children are sodomized in front of their mothers who are also raped. The poor truckers? The poor children of Iraq.

[tiedye]

26. US out of Iraq- already

I agree we should pay for it. But Dick Cheney and Haliburton and US companies should not be the "winners" of those contracts. I say pull the military out, because their ability to positively impact the country is exhausted, at best.
Put money in ordinary Iraqi hands. Start with the children, work your way up.
Shame on you Mister Bush. Shame on you. What a senseless waste of life! Building 12 new military bases in Iraq. Seen iraqbodycount.net lately?

[Disturbed]

27. Quicksand

When you are in quicksand staying the course is not wise.

Iraqis don't want The Occupation. Is that so hard to understand?

The following is the BS that the NeoFascists laid onto Iraq.

Full Sovereignty?

"Throughout the spring, as hundreds died in the spiraling conflict, as Regime bosses applied their hardcore "anti-terrorist" tortures to innocent bystanders raked up in their occupation nets, as Regime mouthpieces prated endlessly of "liberation" and "sovereignty," Bush viceroy Paul Bremer was quietly signing a series of edicts that will give the United States effective control over the military, ministries -- and money -- of any Iraqi government, for years to come, The Wall Street Journal reports.

Bremer has placed U.S.-appointed "commissions" made up of Americans and local puppets throughout Iraqi government agencies; the ministers supposedly in charge weren't even told of the edicts. These boards "will serve multiyear terms and have significant authority to run criminal investigations, award contracts, direct troops and subpoena citizens," the Journal reports. Any new Iraqi government "will have little control over its armed forces, lack the ability to make or change laws and be unable to make major decisions within specific ministries without tacit U.S. approval, say U.S. officials.


Earlier Bremer edicts laid the Iraqi economy wide open to ruthless exploitation by Bush-approved foreign "investors"; dominance of such key sectors as banking, communications -- and energy -- is already well advanced. The latest dictates aim to ensure that this organized looting goes on, no matter what kind of makeshift "interim government" the United Nations manage to piece together. Bush's plans to build a Saddamite fortress embassy in Baghdad and 14 permanent military bases around the country are designed to provide the knee-breaking "security" for these lucrative arrangements."



http://context.themoscowtimes.com/stories/2004/05/21/120.html

It is a pure sham, a US Puppet Govt. Most Americans may be fooled into the false notion that Iraq now has "full sovereignty" but the Iraqis sure a Hell won't be. They damn well know Colonialism when the experience it. Over 30 years of British Colonialism hasn't been forgotten.

The "new" Govt. will fail and it may not even get to the phony elections of Jan.'05. I predict a Mass Uprising against the Occupation, which remains, in mid July. A Civil War in Iraq may not arise as many predict. Perhaps the various factions will hammer out compromises without bloodshed. The excuse of the US Occupation of staying to prevent a Civil War is most likely another ploy to keep 14 Military bases with 100 K US Troops in Iraq to protect the US and other country's Multi-Corps that are entrenching in Iraq. It's not all about the oil.

[tiedye]

30. 14 is it?

thank you. I'll take this to the radio.

[tiedye]

29. spinsanity

A little to the ideological right, Selwynn? Spinsanity is intensely right wing. Follow the first link on Michael Moore bashing and you recognize the humiliation and insulting flavor so very reminiscent of the republican ideology. The author criticizes Moore because he is fat. In an all too long article, the author clearly hates the fact that we don't care if our President has perfectly combed or even washed hair. And, just for future reference, the republicans are anti-intellectuals. They despise the fact that Moore can drive without a license. Dropped out of college and is bringing the President down with art.

[matcom]

31. "How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?"

sorry to be simplistic but that about sums it up for THIS Veteran

[spanone]

34. I saw film of Kerry saying that before congress. Moving.

[spanone]

33. When bush* is gone the world will be more inclined to participate.

He has shown disrespect to anyone who dares challenge him. Kerry will respect world opinion.

[Disturbed]

35. Iraq Invasion was a huge mistake!

It was illegal and a huge blunder. It took the steam out of the real agenda of counter acting the Al Q. threat. Afghanistan is a failure thus far, as well. Most of the Military and even the CIA were against this invasion because it split the effort of Afghanistan. The Prsion Torture and Secret Prison issue will haunt the US regarding other countries beyond any Dem Admin. The US under GW has been disgraced and viewed as hypocritical Imperialists. That truth will be extremely difficult to repair.

I believe that Kerry/Edwards aren't stupid and that they will figure a way out of Iraq. It seems that they feel that now is not the time to address the mistake. Six more months of failure in Iraq will open the door for a Dem Admin. to draw down. At least, I hope that will be the case.

[jpyron]

36. My thoughts

I agree this is a mess that the current administration has got us in. We cannot just pull out after the damage we have done either.

I think we do need to pull back a bit, maybe leave one division, have is based somewhere out of the way, but be able to come in on a moments notice if the Iraqi govt requests help with any security situation.

But we do need to get our guys off the streets and being such a major presence in daily Iraqi life, which is what I think the biggest problem is.

What the incoming govt does need to do is to review all the contacts out for the rebuilding of Iraq. That is where we should let the UN or other nations help out. Seems that the companies that are there now are just in for their on monetary interests which is also giving America a bad name (like we need any more things to do that these days lol ) =/

[tiedye]

39. Kerry will respect the 13 new military bases

Do we have an anti-Iraq war candidate or not?
All you democrats need to push your candidate to stand up for Iraqi sovereignty. Why do you think we are occupying Iraq? Will these reasons change when we get a new President? Do you think he will clean up our image like new American Idol? You think all of the sudden when Kerry gets elected, the world will understand that the US intentions to occupy are for the good of Iraq. Wake up and smell the burning flesh.

[timtom]

37. This is an extremely thoughtful post

However, I take the stance that any people or nation has the sovereign right to work out its own destiny. If they want to be an undemocratic, Islamist state, it's their right. Constitutional republic is the route that WE took. Democracy does not necessarily need to be everyone's choice. What IS imperative (IMO) is that each nation keep their meathooks and grubby paws off their neighbors and each other. Once THAT line is crossed, then it's Katy, bar the door.

What we SHOULD do, instead, is to offer whatever resources the emerging nation requests from us to help repair the broken and razed infrastructure which we, alone, are responsible for trashing.

[tiedye]

40. and a pretty pathetic democracy at that

More people watched the superbowl than voted in this country. And, in that superbowl we were fed adds to increase the population (viagra) and denied the deficit message (moveon.) We are trained to accept an apartheid government. The few rule the many. We are all colored.