U.S. in Iraq: Should We Stay or Should We Go?

[Spazito]

BAGHDAD, Oct 28 (IPS) -- After the single deadliest day in Baghdad since the fall of Saddam Hussein (news - web sites)'s regime, the coalition forces find themselves in a quandary.

Three suicide bombing attacks against police stations in various corners of the capital, one that was foiled, and a fifth attack against the office of the International Red Cross killed 34 people and wounded 224, according to deputy interior minister Brig. Gen. Ahmed Ibrahim.

<snip>

The bombings have confronted the coalition forces with a stark choice. To borrow from an old song, it is ”Should I Stay or Should I Go?”


If U.S. forces continue to play the major security role, the increasing casualty figures may become too prohibitive in the months approaching the next U.S. presidential election.

more

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=655&e=4&u=/oneworld/4536714231067348877

[La_Serpiente]

1. I have never felt that we should leave

However, this is a military occupation really. We need to get the US out and the UN in. There is no doubt about it. Otherwise, this will turn into a Vietnam.

I think it is immoral to leave a country in tatters after bombing the shit out of it.

But if it gets really bad...like the amount killed per week increases, then I think we really need to get out of there. I wouldn't know what would be an appropriate number though.

Does anyone have a chart of how many soldiers have been killed since the end of major fighting? Perhaps it is increasing at a gradual rate.

[glarius]

4. The USA "bombed the shit out of it" as you said..Why would other countries

want to send their soldiers to replace Americans as sitting ducks targets?....I think that is the big problem. Sad as I feel for the young Americans dying over there, I wouldn't want to see my country (Canada)'s young people replace them...I suspect many other countries feel the same way...We were all against the war from the beginning...I don't know what the answer is...It's sad...

[Dulcinea]

2. ...If I go there will be trouble....

...And if I stay it will be double...

sorry, couldn't resist! :evilgrin:

[ugarte]

3. Look on the bright side

Being bogged down in Iraq keeps us from causing trouble elsewhere.

(Small consolation to the dead, I know.)

[gratuitous]

5. This is very, very bad

The fact that there is a serious discussion about up and leaving, without hysterical catcalls from the repressive right, means that this is an idea that is taking hold in the public mind. There will come a point when a majority of folks sees every successive military death as wholly unnecessary (there's a minority now, but it's growing), and when talk turns to who will be the last KIA in Iraq, you know it's over.

Iraq has been playing out like Vietnam at internet speed. Broadband.

[Fovea]

6. Very Astute

The right has burned a lot of goodwill for its followers
who wanted to be part of a winning team, but not part
of a goon squad.

The moral conservatives are horrified by our policies and rhetoric as well, but they have been too 'patriotic', as in cowed by paternalism, to protest. But now that their heroes have turned out to be entirely made of clay, as opposed to simply the feet, they are filing out of the party rally quietly, as to not attract attention to themselves.

I expect a book from Ann Coulter any day now on how we are making Iraq into a capitalist paradise. That will be a sign that no one, even the right believes in remaining in Iraq.

Yes, the only thing NeoConservatism has is money, everything else is emnity. Soon the hostilities will be in DC, because that is what our policies have brought us. I predict that the trip from the gas pump to the detonator will become faster, and more profitable in the coming months. Why? Because Halliburton and Unocal will make higher profits in time of scarcity, even if it is politically induced scarcity. This actually will be gamed by industry strategists for higher profits.

Imagine this Whitehouse opposing such an idea.

[cally]

7. I swear the press are insane

That someone could write this and not say how evil it is confounds me. Not whether the US should be there, not if the "danger" from Iraq is over, not the tragedy of so many lives lost, no the danger is that the * won't be re-elected. :crazy:


"If U.S. forces continue to play the major security role, the increasing casualty figures may become too prohibitive in the months approaching the next U.S. presidential election."

[rocktivity]

8. "We're going to end up with a war

that has Viet Nam's fingerprints all over it."

--Rocknation, late September 2001

[NNN0LHI]

9. As bad as pulling out sounds, there is no way the Republicans...

...will be going into next election with the current state of affairs in Iraq. No way. That I promise.

Don

[rusk2003]

10. We need to go now

Saddam is out of power his sons are dead there is no weapons in Iraq eithher Saddam gave them to terrorists or they founs them and got them. But I think there was little or no weapons in Iraq. Becasue If he had them why did't he use them when we invaded.

[kskiska]

11. We went in there for political reasons

We'll pull out for political reasons, too.

[Karenina]

12. The Americans will leave Iraq

The ONLY question is how much more death and destruction will be wrought before the troops are withdrawn. When her abused, mentally and physically sickened and PERMANENTLY DAMAGED sons and daughters return, her citizens will be forced to face the the scope of the clusterfuck they allowed to be perpetrated. There is NO upside to an American presence there at this point. Zero, nada, basta, zilch. The situation a bottomless pit of a disaster, the horror growing exponentially with every passing day. The cynic in me is very concerned very few will return to tell the tale... What's the body count on Pfc. Lynch's unit?
4 dead? FOUR???