Yes, that makes a lot of sense, but why haven't we done so? Why haven't we set a time table? Is it a failure of the Bush administration? A failure of the military, a lack of international agreement on the exact prosal? Are we lingering in Iraq because we don't know what to do with Iran? Are we afraid that it may split into 3 regions and another war might erupt? Are we still there because by being there we make money, or at least off set some of the earlier expenses? Are we there because we don't trust the Iraqis, think they're just incapable of running a democratic, modern state? Are we afraid that it might get influenced by religious extremists and become a safe heaven for the terrorists of the future?

Henderson and 03, I have a question for you. For the sake of this question, pretend you are the president.

If the Iraqis were to say today that they wanted to the US to leave Iraq, what you do? Stay anyway? Leave?

Since Iraq is well on its way towards governing itself I would say Obama's stance is outdated, he is arguing how to handle a pre-surge Iraq and ignoring the changes that have taken place since then. Ask someone who was in country before and after the surge, they will tell you that Iraq is far better off today than it was 2 years ago, Iraqi's themselves are in charge of 70% of the country today with the US presence ranging from non-existant to heavy support. Even the AP has reported that Iraq tody is far difference than it was 18-24 months ago. As I said before, Obama is treating Iraq as if it were still 2006. McCain was right about the Surge, he is applying the lessons learned from Vietnam to Iraq, something which nobody else in government has done at any step in the war so far.

Originally Posted by Lunatik

Yes, that makes a lot of sense, but why haven't we done so? Why haven't we set a time table? Is it a failure of the Bush administration? A failure of the military, a lack of international agreement on the exact prosal? Are we lingering in Iraq because we don't know what to do with Iran? Are we afraid that it may split into 3 regions and another war might erupt? Are we still there because by being there we make money, or at least off set some of the earlier expenses? Are we there because we don't trust the Iraqis, think they're just incapable of running a democratic, modern state? Are we afraid that it might get influenced by religious extremists and become a safe heaven for the terrorists of the future?

That's the question only a few people know the TRUE answer to... I am definitely not one of them.

Originally Posted by Rob Henderson

So we should get out? And tell me, what happens to Iraq once the only stable factor (the US) is gone? Do we just watch it burn to the ground?

When the alternative ends much like the Sovet war in Afghanistan, I'd say that we have no other real alternative. Either get out of the burning building or go up with it...

Originally Posted by Lunatik

Yes, that makes a lot of sense, but why haven't we done so? Why haven't we set a time table? Is it a failure of the Bush administration? A failure of the military, a lack of international agreement on the exact prosal? Are we lingering in Iraq because we don't know what to do with Iran? Are we afraid that it may split into 3 regions and another war might erupt? Are we still there because by being there we make money, or at least off set some of the earlier expenses? Are we there because we don't trust the Iraqis, think they're just incapable of running a democratic, modern state? Are we afraid that it might get influenced by religious extremists and become a safe heaven for the terrorists of the future?

I'd say yes to all.

Originally Posted by Damien435

Since Iraq is well on its way towards governing itself I would say Obama's stance is outdated, he is arguing how to handle a pre-surge Iraq and ignoring the changes that have taken place since then. Ask someone who was in country before and after the surge, they will tell you that Iraq is far better off today than it was 2 years ago, Iraqi's themselves are in charge of 70% of the country today with the US presence ranging from non-existant to heavy support. Even the AP has reported that Iraq tody is far difference than it was 18-24 months ago. As I said before, Obama is treating Iraq as if it were still 2006. McCain was right about the Surge, he is applying the lessons learned from Vietnam to Iraq, something which nobody else in government has done at any step in the war so far.

The surge is overrated. Yes, it reduced violence in and around major cities, but there are still towns and cities which have been deemed too dangerous to enter that we don't even go near. We can't hold this country down forever.

Originally Posted by The Other Guy

The surge is overrated. Yes, it reduced violence in and around major cities, but there are still towns and cities which have been deemed too dangerous to enter that we don't even go near. We can't hold this country down forever.

I am not sure you can call it over rated as it clearly had its successes but what I am not sure of is whether they were genuine successes or whether they were a sign of an intelligent resistance who saw extra troops and decided to sit it out waiting for softer target.

I would imagine that the smarter of the insurgents know that as the election approaches there will be a decrease in the number of troops and it is clear that a limited pull out is on the cards so why risk it when you can achieve the same thing in a few months much easier.

Originally Posted by MontyB

I am not sure you can call it over rated as it clearly had its successes but what I am not sure of is whether they were genuine successes or whether they were a sign of an intelligent resistance who saw extra troops and decided to sit it out waiting for softer target.

It has had successes, yes, but not as many as it's being given credit for. Thus, I use overrated.

Originally Posted by WNxRogue

Henderson and 03, I have a question for you. For the sake of this question, pretend you are the president.

If the Iraqis were to say today that they wanted to the US to leave Iraq, what you do? Stay anyway? Leave?

If all the Iraqis in Iraq wanted us to leave, I would. But I doubt all or even most Iraqis would want us to right now.

Originally Posted by Rob Henderson

If all the Iraqis in Iraq wanted us to leave, I would. But I doubt all or even most Iraqis would want us to right now.

Good. Because in the end its their country, and the choice to allow us to stay there is theirs. We can not be known as the people who randomly occupy countries for 10 years or more. That will lower our standing in the world I'd imagine.

And if you read my other posts, you'd read that I DO believe we should get out ASAP. But I don't think we can just leave them cold.