On why pulling out of Iraq is the "must-have-happen" issue of many in our country, and one of the reasons why people who are voting for Sen. Obama claim they are voting for him. We "won" the Spanish-American war in 1898, and until 1992 had forces in the Phillipines. We "won" World War I in 1918, and pulled troops home the following year. This, in large part, allowed the militarization of Germany to go unchecked in the late 1920's and 30's. We "won" World War II in 1945, and still have around 75,000 troops in Germany (over half of what we have "occupying" Iraq and Afghanistan) and 50,000 in Japan. We signed a cease-fire in Korea in 1954, and still have around 50,000 troops stationed in South Korea. We "lost" Vietnam in the mid-70's and brought everyone home. What followed was a pretty sizable destruction of the culture, infrastructure and human rights in the land. We won the Persian gulf war in 1991, brought many of the troops home in 1993, and Saddam Hussein spent most of the next 10 years harassing US airplanes enforcing UN sanctions, dealing with terrorists and generally being a detriment to good order and discipline throughout the world. Now many say that "our troops have to come home". Sen. Obama's original plans (being out of the country for most of the summer, I don't know if they have changed) was a categorical "rydo not pass Go, bring the troops home within 6 months" or something strategy that seems as if the Senator has never read a book on military history. It puzzles me that General Powell would endorse the Senator's plan for this. (Though to be fair, almost every other military authority of the last generation is endorsing McCain -- http://rightwingwizkid.blogspot.com/2008/10/colin-powell-endorses-obama-excuse-me.html -- sorry for the partisan take, but I think those names are facts). Just as an analyst of history, and someone who has spent the latter half of my short life in one uniform or another in leadership capacities, it seems that herding the sheep of America into bleating for troop withdrawal, and then appeasing them is not the mark of a good leader/executive. The "common man" can't pick Iraq out on a map, and doesn't realize that having a well-trained, stabilizing force allows economy and infrastructure to grow. Japan, Korea and Germany seem to be doing pretty well with a sizable American military presence.
Bottom line, we withdraw our troops before the government can fight for itself, we lose Iraq to the Iranian-controlled Shiites. We'll also see human rights abuses of Sunnis (as they were primarily the Baathists). It will be a worse situation than if we let Saddam stay in power.
So when will you consider the job to be done? They already have installed a democratic government. Their economy is stable enough that they have generated a $80 billion surplus. How about asking them to invest some of their own money into infrastructure and a military? A smart, sustained withdrawal of the majority of our forces is the wise move at this point. I'm sick and tired of spending $16 Billion a month (when you break that down, it comes out to about $100/month per American household) on Iraq. Especially when our strategy there is completely flawed. A large, occupying force is a sitting duck. The other side doesn't wear uniforms or occupy large military bases or make easily identifiable troop movements. When you are fighting a war against a faceless enemy ... swift, targeted attacks based on a well-developed intelligence system is a much more prudent method. We're using 20th Century military strategies against a 21st Century enemy. I'd much rather see us spend half of what we're spending now to work with the Iraqis to create a new intelligence system to root out and take out enemies. So, while I'm for sending a large amount of our troops home, I'm not suggesting (nor is Obama or anyone on his campaign) that we completely wash our hands of the area. Just change the strategy and stop handing out free services to the Iraqi government. -Pop
So you think the war is won? If so, then sure, withdraw away. I would prefer to gain some economic considerations before withdrawing, but I'm evil.
A) The majority of Iraquis are Shiites. "Installing democracy" and "preventing Iranian takeover" are mutually exclusive. B) This was the real mistake of Vietnam. We spent American lives and resources propping up a government that was never going to fight for itself. It had nothing to do with them being able to defend themselves, they just didn't have the will. We are setting ourselves up for the same fiasco here. C) Yes, removing Saddam just made things worse. Bush I predicted that. Pity his idjit son didn't listen to him!
If its not mission accomplished, no troop withdrawl until we've "won". And no, I did not read your post. Just the first sentence.
In Iraq, we are very bad people doing very bad things to the majority populace at Haliburton's request. America used to be way better than this, a very long time ago.
