Election 2008: War in Iraq

Obama and Biden seem the sensible choice.

I find this category rather confusing as I agree with the Obama/Biden logic but I am not sure I agree with their solution and then on the other hand I don't agree with McCains argument yet I lean towards his solution.

Obama is right in my opinion that the Iraqi's themselves have shown a great reluctance to take control for themselves and giving them a date to get their act together or face the mess alone makes sense yet the thought of just saying "well we are done catch ya later" and going home I don't think is the right approach any departure from Iraq has to be carefully managed and done at a time that the insurgency is weakened enough for the Iraqi's to take over effectively.

The problem I see with McCain is that he seems to have forgotten that the Iraqi's have a say in this and if the US starts to agrivate the Iraqi government no matter how weak it may be now in the long term it will assume control and probably wont be the shining pro-American beacon he is hoping for, Arabs seem to have very long memories for people that upset them. Yet his solution (aka we have to finish the job is the right one).
 
And this is where we should take the best from both worlds. We need to remember that the Iraqis will eventually have to run their own country, but until then, we CANNOT leave them to their own devices. We have to respect them, but only when they are ready for our respect. With respect comes responsibility. They have to uphold their reputation as WILLING to run their own government before we can allow them the freedom to do so.
 
And this is where we should take the best from both worlds. We need to remember that the Iraqis will eventually have to run their own country, but until then, we CANNOT leave them to their own devices. We have to respect them, but only when they are ready for our respect. With respect comes responsibility. They have to uphold their reputation as WILLING to run their own government before we can allow them the freedom to do so.

Do you honestly think it is right to tell a sovereign people they are not allowed to run their own government in their own country?

The US has to respect other nations as well. Iraq is a nation, recognized by most countries in the world. Its not a US state, and not just a US military base. If they asked us to leave, we would most likely leave. Why? Because its their country.

What you wrote up there is a occupation. Our job is not to occupy other countries and dictate when they are "allowed" freedom.
 
Last edited:
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?
 
No there needs to be a time table. Or at least a plan to turn the running of Iraq over to Iraqi's. We can't just say "Take your time." they need a base line. They need to understand that we won't prop up an ineffectual goverment forever.

Eventually we have to leave and we need a plan to leave and a solid plan to draw down. We need to inform the Iraqi's of that plan and stick to it. We need to help with the security and rebuilding of the infrastructure, but they need to take an increasing interest in their own future and increasing interest in self governing themselves in all that entails.
 
No there needs to be a time table. Or at least a plan to turn the running of Iraq over to Iraqi's. We can't just say "Take your time." they need a base line. They need to understand that we won't prop up an ineffectual goverment forever.

Eventually we have to leave and we need a plan to leave and a solid plan to draw down. We need to inform the Iraqi's of that plan and stick to it. We need to help with the security and rebuilding of the infrastructure, but they need to take an increasing interest in their own future and increasing interest in self governing themselves in all that entails.
Agreed. That's why I said take the best of both worlds. We need to tell them that we WILL NOT be there forever. We WILL leave Iraq eventually. But we cannot simply withdraw. We can't just LEAVE them. We have to leave slowly, surely, and confidently. We need to be sure that a good governement has a fighting chance.
 
In order to get them to believe it. You need to tell them "Look on such and such date such and such Brigade is withdrawing from Province X.You need to take responsibilty there." And then do it.

That's what we haven't been doing. We've let them drag their feet. We need to stop.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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...
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.
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
Back
Top