How can we get out of Iraq with some sence of victory and knowing that what we wanted to accomplish was met?

HokiePaul

framing the war as a search for weapons of mass distruction was a mistake. In reality, there were lots of reasons to go into Iraq, starting with the removal of a murdering dictator who had shown agression in the past (i.e. Kuwait in early 90's). Its a shame the president did not make this case to the American people more strongly. If the president had exposed the genocide of the Kurdish people in northern Iraq and the oppression of certain sects within Iraq, the weapons of mass destruction argument would have been irrelevent.

We have achieved some victory already by removing a evil person and giving the Iraqis some fundamental freedom in their goverment that they did not have before. The next victory is security, and will be achieved when the Iraqi people and military step up to the plate and help our American, British, and other allied soldiers keep terrorists and extreamists out. We as Americans can help achieve this goal by supporting our military and giving the President's new plan to increase troops in Baghdad a chance. Whether you like him or not, he'll be the president for 2 more years, and he can accomplish more with our support than without.

wayne v

we already had the victory ,when we booted out Saddam . that was the mission . all this other stuff with the fighting among themselves is what is a natural order of a new government being formed this is all new to an oppressed people with new freedom. every free nation on earth went Thu the same transition. sadly to say it all ends in a war being fought

tokes

Terrorism is the issue we went to Iraq over. Terrorists come from everywhere, even America. We have only succeded in showing the world that we have muscles. How many of you are still impressed when Arnold flexes? My point is, we're barking up the wrong tree. Granted there are probably large concentrations of terrorists in Iraq, but this will only make them more determined to act against us. Now they are more focused on the USA than ever. Why, because we are flexing our muscles. It's rather embarrasing to me. All eyes are on us now. ALL of them. We made everything worse for ourselves. I hope some good comes to the people of Iraq who are not terrorists. That's about all we can do to redeem ourselves is genuinely try to help them. Even silent war, like snipers, would probably be better for the war on terrorism. Something that focuses on the issue that actually is threatening our country. Oh, yeah, what about that big farce called oil? We know how to get by without gas. Maybe if we spent more energy on that instead of trying to fix other countries problems with force, we would make some headway and not be "dependant on fossil fuel"

dze

thats "our" goals ... but its a total assumption on ur part that it is our governments goal to leave iraq ...

NativeBear

Well, This is a tough one my friend. United States is one of the riches country in the world. People will be looking to us for help. It's our responsibility to help. Now, I'm not in support of the war. My other side to this is the government or Republican government is using this war to get rich. Rockerfeller or whatever his name is....this is how he gets rich. White Republicans getting rich off the war!! There are Democrats in the same area as Republicans. I think Bush is a liar using religion as a front. Religion is a big player in this war-all big religions controling innocent lives.

Akkita

**The Iraqi government claims in one interview to want us there - in another to want us gone. Depending on the news show decides which claim you see.

**Everyone gets to hear how the militants want us gone. They would quit killing civilians if the coalition troops weren't there.
Does that make ANY sense at all? Did I missed their point?

If Prime Minister al-Maliki was so willing to take over his government - we would be gone and the UN would be there, WITHOUT US this time. The UN dumped everything and left in 2003 because they lost 22 peacekeepers, so give it back to them. The UN claims it has great ideas and the willingness but can't while coalition forces are there.

Excerpt of Resolution 1637
#1Notes that the presence of the multinational force in Iraq is at the request of the Government of Iraq and having regard to the letters annexed to this resolution, reaffirms the authorization for the multinational force as set forth in resolution 1546 (2004) and decides to extend the mandate of the multinational force as set forth in that resolution 1546 (2004) until 31 December 2006;
#2. Decides further that the mandate for the multinational force shall be reviewed at the request of the Government of Iraq or no later than 15 June 2006, and declares that it will terminate this mandate earlier if requested by the Government of Iraq.

Iraq won't terminate this mandate - they keep expanding it. There in lays a problem people are to lazy to grasp.....I am tired of all the BS . Let Iraq figure it out - I am getting sick of their constant do -nothing and blame the US or Bush for our troops still being there.

Jenela

That is hard to answer, I think, because I am willing to change my opinions about that subject anytime I hear new information. Some people are not. Right now, I really think that there is a lot we don't know about and that there probably would be a lot of serious terroristic attacks on the U. S. if we can't help to get Iraq stabilized. Of course, I am sure it is not just Iraq, but if some of those countries can become successfully democratized, then the terrorists will not have near as many "friends" as they used to have". The terrorists hate the western world, and don't might waiting as long as they have to to destroy it. I think the president has information to support that. I don't know what the best way is to prevent that, but I am not sure that anyone else knows any better. I do hate seeing so many of our soldiers having to go there and risk their lives though, and that is what is the most disturbing about it, but what if it is really somehow preventing mass destruction of our own country involving all of us unlike anything we have ever seen. Also, almost every soldier from around here that has come back from Iraq, has said that they were told over and over by people they met in Iraq that they were so very thankful for them. We don't hear that at all from the media. So, right now, I don't have strong opinions about the war. I am taking in all the information I can, and am waiting to see how it turns out. I pray that it will have been a good decision for our country. I think that we need to have tried something for our own good, but you know, countries around the world can't always just look out for themselves. Every country that is able has a global obligation to help other countries in whatever way it can. Besides, the United States might now be a free country if it had not been for France.

Andy

So you want a sense of victory and accomplishment, do you? These require the establishment of America's interests. She is interested in: 1) Bringing her soldiers home without humiliation, 2) Avenging the deaths of her citizens in New York and Washington DC, 3) Destroying all enemies with the capability and inclination of copying the suicide attacks of 9/11, and 4) Protecting herself from state sponsors of those terrorists.

Interest #1 required the invasion of Iraq, else our troops would forever remain in the Muslim Holy Land of Saudi Arabia, continually provoking the extremists against us.
Interest #2 shows American rage as a clear message of her power and care for her fellow citizens. It was directly responsible for our aggression in Afghanistan.
#3 is a natural and healthy response to established threats (Al Qaida), and #4 is required (so far, against the Taliban and Saddam Hussein's regime) for effective prosecution of #3: The ally of an enemy is an enemy.

Our continued presence is required in order to avoid reversing the progress established in advancing #s 3 and 4. The only way to get out of foreign countries is to ensure that one's enemies understand quite clearly that they cannot win when we are gone, lest we return swiftly, eagerly, and effectively with grave consequence to their cause. As far as victory goes, we simply need to recognize that we have already accomplished all four points, but need only to solidify them with the clear and loud message to all of our firm prosecution against any who try to reverse our work.

omniscious

many arguement is that if we leave now, all we did was for nothing, just like Vietnam, so the plan is now to increase the army to finish what we started quicker. I dunt like the Iraq war but i have to agree with the plan.

jessicablakey1

I believe we should be over there. Have faith in our president. When you join the armed forces you knowingly sign papers saying you will fight for your country. you all want the people out you also all want your gas prices lower. You are americans and should care about the well being of others.

President Bush should have listened to Pope John Paul II, and never went in.
Now I am afraid there is no getting out. To leave that region in that condition is a crime. At least they had order before the invasion. How would Americans feel if their leaders were accused of that kind of international crime....
We as a nation now are responsible.......
I am no sadam supporter, but that region is violent and unruleable since ancient times.
Many empires have tried to bring their version of order to that region, and have failed.

How were we so proud and blind to think we were different from the history.

Diamond24

The same way we did in Vietnam, we don't!

Bruce B

Iraq's government will never be stable. And we can't accomplish our goals. You cannot enter into one of the oldest civilizations on the planet, where wars between tribes has always existed and then expect to stop it.

But don't fret. When we do pull out of Iraq, this is when the Spin Doctors will earn their dollar and most likely; day in the sun.

blinkingsupastar!Â©

We can't. Whether we stay and build up troops and resources or simply leave, we can't achieve success.

popeyethesadist

Anyone thinking that Iraq will be better in the future is imbibing in a pipedream. Whoever replaces Saddam will be just as bad. Our only chance for any sort of "victory" will be bombing the whole M.E. into glass.

uncle fester

You need to pack up & slink off with your tail between your legs. Theres no dignity in this, it's a war that can't be won. It's another Vietnam, why don't the American military learn from their mistakes?

hushnowjustplayit

The problem with your question is that the US didn't go in there looking for WMD - that was just an excuse made up to get a toe hold on a way to control the oil flow. The whole world knows it.

Bush's first win was rigged with the help of his brother in Florida and the oil companies. The second time he made a sweetheart deal with the charismatic Christian set to swing the vote his way and then double-crossed them.

Bush is a puppet with Chaney's hand moving his mouth. Behind Chaney are the oil companies and the big companies that depend on oil.

Do you really think that anything is actually going to change now? It doesn't matter who gets into office because the bottom line is money will buy any elected official anywhere, anytime. If you don't believe that you are naive.

notyou311

Iraq did NOT "mess with the US." They were never a threat to us. We supported the war at the beginning because we were lied to by the Pres. Now we know the truth after many of our brave troops died needlessly and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis died. We need to withdraw slowly. The Iraqis have to protect and govern their own country. We cannot stay there now that there is a civil war -- which we caused. There is no chance of victory. We just need to get out.

Think Richlyâ„¢

Great question. I think it is the people's decision, not the government's decision to pull out the troops. The real question is no longer, "should we pull out?", but rather "can we afford NOT to pull out?"

Here is an exerpt from a news article:

"We read the paper and notice that Iraq seems to have gotten much more brutal and dangerous since it has enjoyed the benefits of democracy. On a single day last week, one hundred people died in Iraq. Thirty thousand died last year, said the press reports. The numbers of dead and maimed keep rising.

So do the costs.

Nicholas Kristof, of the New York Times, notices that our president is in roughly the same position as Alcibiades in ancient Athens. The man had led the country to war in Sicilyâ€¦after others had warned him that it was a dangerous waste of time and money. According to Thucydides' account, Nicias said of the campaign, "[it is] a war that does not concern us." But Alcibiades had insisted, claiming that the Athenians would be welcomed as liberatorsâ€¦and that the 'rabble' would be easily defeated.

As it turned out, the campaign went badly. And so the pro-war groups had to go back to the Athenian people, asking for more money and more troops. What they needed, they said, was a 'surge' that would finally overcome resistance. At that stage, they couldn't honorably face the prospect of defeat and withdrawal. So, against much internal opposition, the new troops were raised - 5,000 of them - and sent, on 70 ships, to support the war effort in Sicily.

The result was a catastrophic defeat. Not only was the Sicilian adventure a total failure, it so weakened the Athenian state, that its enemies ganged up on it and the country was soon conquered by the Spartans. Thousands of Athenians were killed. Thousands more were sold into slavery. And Athens became a vassal state, paying tribute to Sparta and its allies.

For more on the Greeks' campaign in Sicilyâ€¦as well as the fate of the Athenian empire: The Essential Classics."

History usually repeats itself if people forget to learn the lessons from history.

orcs8myhead

You may disagree, but we can't. Weapons of mass destruction was the only reason to go in and that just wasn't the case. We can not achieve our goal in Iraq because we have no goal. We stepped in and tried to tell them how they should act. What would happen if a country did that to us, think about it.

C B

Staying until the job is done would be nice. Unfortunately, the media has sabotaged yet another war. Walter Cronkite's legacy lives.

Iraq will only have peace when Iraqi's want it. The simplest solution for the US would be to divide the country. The biggest problem with that is finding an equitable way to split up the oil revenues in a way that will satiate most of them.

I doubt the US will take this route in spite of its relative prudence.

Tones

By getting our troops out of Iraq, we can celebrate a sort of sense of victory by the fact that 3,000+ soldiers died instead of 60,000 like in the Korean and Vietnam wars.

Houston Attorney

See my question regarding the partition of Iraq for your answer.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: