The heart of the question on whether a withdrawl from Iraq is good or not

[danzig]

Simple question and one an ABCNews reporter asked today of Harry Reid and was given no answer : Do you think the Iraqi people will be safer with U.S. troops out?

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpu...bout-th-1.html

Political bias, belief on the war on whether it was right or wrong aside. What do you guys think, as bad as Iraq is right now would it be any better for the average Iraqi with US troops gone? For people who will jump at the chance to go well it cant be any worse, stop and think about that for a moment as US withdrawal will not make those ethnic clashes disappear. Please spare this thread of any political rantings on the evilness of any party or rehashing what we all know, its a simple question but not a simple answer and lets stick to that and that alone please.

[Who]

DELETED

[karo]

I think they never should have started the war but it's started now and they can't pull back their troops now or els a ful scale civil war will start and many more Iraqis will day so they need to stay for now till the Iraqis are ready to run their own country

[killerchinchilla]

On the one hand those who invaded Iraq should sort out the situation thats developed due to their policy decisions once Saddam had been deposed. On the other hand I feel the presence their isn't helping the situation and perhaps leaving would be best all round.

[removeduser_487563287433]

Immediately, no.

[hsimoorb]

It'll get worse before it gets better, no matter what. So no, they won't be safer without our troops there. Our troops will be far safer if they arne't over there though

[Mangalore]

If the US troops stay the situation will remain as it is for a long time: unsafe.
If the US troops leave the situation will remain as it is or get worse for a long time: unsafe.

Currently it is not really visible in what way the US forces would be capable to make things better. Sadly it is also not forseeable how things should get better if the US troops weren't there.

I fear Iraq is still building up to the worst part which might be a fullblown ethnic civil war with foreign interventions from neighboring countries which will make Bosnia look like a picnic... well it already does now.

[Tiwaz]

Once occupiers withdraw from Iraq, it will result in civil war in Iraq.

Question is, is it better to have prolonged low intensity civil war followed by what might be shorter intense civil war or better to have whole thing burn itself out rapidly?

Can't say.

Either way, due to unique location and natural resources of Iraq, one of main reasons for Bushy to get so worried of iraqi plight instead of millions of africans, we should not ask if IRAQ will be better off.

Iraq is lost already. Only thing remaining to do is to avoid civil war in Iraq from destabilising whole region and/or causing economical collapse due to oil supply disruptions from Middle East wide war.

[karo]

Think what would happen if Iraq was in a ful scale civil war it could lead to a regional war. And what if some terrorist think they could use a atomic bom to kill their enemy state

[Black Hawk]

I think we should honor their wishes, but the kurds want us to stay for fear of reappraisals from Iraqis, Turkey, Iran, etc. So maybe we keep a small force in kurdish territory, but as to how Turkey would react to that is anyones guess, they have already amassed over 100,000 troops in their border.

[issues]

No.

We (U.S.) have to be responsible for our actions. It is one of the first things you learn as you are growing up and it applies to this situation except this time it affects millions of people. At best we can avoid millions of lives from possibly dying if we leave. I don't want that too be a stain on our history, I want the U.S. to be remembered for staying there to help despite the reason for being there being totally wrong. We're there, that is it.

[Crimson Scythe]

I think we should honor their wishes, but the kurds want us to stay for fear of reappraisals from Iraqis, Turkey, Iran, etc. So maybe we keep a small force in kurdish territory, but as to how Turkey would react to that is anyones guess, they have already amassed over 100,000 troops in their border.

To be fair, most of those troops have been there for years, and their current deployment has the aim of interdiction of PKK groups at the border. It's only in the last 2 or 3 months that the order of battle has been changed to include more armoured forces. But at the same time, armoured troops are less vulnerable to the ambushes the PKK often employs.

And to be honest, US troops won't really deter the Turkish military if the decision is made to enter northern Iraq, just as British and UN troops in Cyprus didn't prevent Turkish action there in 1974. And even if the US troops tried to act to deter Turkish troops, the US would lose the little bit of credibility it has left in the region by turning on its only significant regional ally.

But as to the question of withdrawal. It won't make a difference to the Iraqis whether US troops leave or not. They're screwed either way. With the US troops in-country they're increasingly likely to get caught in a crossfire. Without US troops, they'll likely be attacked directly and openly in a civil war. Violence is unavoidable at this point. But as bloody as civil wars usually are, they also tend to lead to a decisive conclusion to sectarian and ethnic tensions. The US is trying to prevent a war, but is really only temporarily suppressing the tensions, a task that is proving more and more difficult. I'm of the opinion that the US should just pull out and let the issue sort itself out. The US is going to take the heat one way or another, but at least this way she'll save herself the American casualties.

[Tom Paine]

Personal opinion on this? I'm not wholly sure. Clearly, the presence of US and UK troops is inflaming some sections of the community in Iraq, and causing violence. However, would their absence not cause more sectarian violence, especially given potential involvement by Saudi Arabia and the continuing involvement of Iran? Would the removal of the US/UK "common enemy" cause it to settle down, or to implode? I fear the latter. So, stay in, from me.

[deRougemont]

Pulling out would be a disaster; all the money and lives spent over the past few fews would be for naught, and we would end up having to return there in the future anyway...

[sapi]

Pulling out would be a disaster; all the money and lives spent over the past few fews would be for naught, and we would end up having to return there in the future anyway...

It's irrelevant whether the US troops stay or not; civil war is inevitable.

Best, from a purely objective perspective, to have only Iraqis killing Iraqis without western troops being thrown into the crossfire.

We might as well save the lives of our troops today, so we can come and clean up the mess once the civil war is over...

[removeduser_487563287433]

Pulling out would be a disaster; all the money and lives spent over the past few fews would be for naught, and we would end up having to return there in the future anyway...

So your solution is to spend more money and lives for naught, when we may end up having to return there in the future anyway?

*slow clapping*

[danzig]

It's irrelevant whether the US troops stay or not; civil war is inevitable.

Best, from a purely objective perspective, to have only Iraqis killing Iraqis without western troops being thrown into the crossfire.

We might as well save the lives of our troops today, so we can come and clean up the mess once the civil war is over...

Problem is and you know it will happen that if a civil war does happen and it results in thousands upon thousands of dead even approaching a genocidal level then blame will be placed on the US for pulling out and allowing it to happen. It's a no win situation for pretty much Iraq and the US both regardless of the choice.

[removeduser_487563287433]

Problem is and you know it will happen that if a civil war does happen and it results in thousands upon thousands of dead even approaching a genocidal level then blame will be placed on the US for pulling out and allowing it to happen. It's a no win situation for pretty much Iraq and the US both regardless of the choice.

Well frankly we're going to find limited sympathy when we invaded the place on a lie and were disgustingly corrupt in the rebuilding process.

[jankren]

If the US troops pulled out before securing the flow of Iraqi oil to pay for the war cost then the tens of billions of debt caused by the Iraq war could lead USA into economic destruction. Therefore, if I was an American I would support the occupation of Iraqi solely for the economic survival of my own country.

[removeduser_487563287433]

If the US troops pulled out before securing the flow of Iraqi oil to pay for the war cost then the tens of billions of debt caused by the Iraq war could lead USA into economic destruction. Therefore, if I was an American I would support the occupation of Iraqi solely for the economic survival of my own country.

What? You reckon we get any oil out of Iraq now? The US has other oil sources and is about to get a Democratic President. The economy will recover.