U.S. Withdrawal In Iraq

Post Reply New Topic

I am against a timetable withdrawal in Iraq.

As kind to the ear it is to hear that the war is winding down to a close, the main problem with a timetable withdrawal is that it is deciding 2011's policv now, when we have no knowledge of what awaits us in the future. If it's December of 2011 and troops still need to remain, then they should remain.

In this case, in Iraq, the US is gradually withdrawing troops in hopes that the Iraqi army will be strong enough to take over the fighting and defend their country. Very similar to Nixon's policy of Vietnamization - an utter failure.

The problem with a gradual withdrawal is that the US may chose to withdraw a couple thousand troops every month or so, but the Iraqi soldiers might not be keeping up with the pace and we might not realize that until near the end of the withdrawal process, and that would be a fatal mistake.

It is better to get the job done correctly, rather than withdrawing too quickly and having to re-fight the war.

There should be no withdrawal until the war is won. Otherwise, it is not withdrawal, it is retreat.

We are accomplishing nothing in Iraq. We need to get out of there as soon as possible to minimize the number of US servicemen killed needlessly.

What do you mean, if troops need to remain? There is no reason for them to be there in the first place.

Comparison to Nixon's Vietnam policy- what alternative would you have proposed? As it was, our involvement in the Vietnam War lasted over twenty years. There was no conceivable successful strategy in Vietnam, and it's the same situation in Iraq today. It requires a staggering ignorance of history and the nature of guerrilla warfare to honestly believe that we can win the conflict. The best we can do is minimize our losses.

fools and madmen stand their ground when beaten with nothing to defend