What's so wrong with the "Cut & Run" option in Iraq?

[franksumatra]

Why does everyone gasp when it's suggested we immediately pull out of the bloody mess in Iraq? We should leave there post haste, forget our foolish pride, save our men and women from sacrifice.

But say it out loud and people start howling about how terrible it would be to just leave. Apparently the neo cons don't particularly care how many people die over Bush's foolish pride, and the imperialist's plans for conquering the Arab world.

CUT AND RUN NOW. There's no shame in it for God's sake.

[StephanieMarie]

1. Nothing wrong.

Some General last week (wish I could remember) actually posited that our presence there is fueling the violence. Imagine that. And he suggested that our pulling out would reduce the violence, maybe even eliminate it. He said it is hatred of Americans (wonder why?) that is fueling the violence.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

2. yeah...it's all about us...

Americans are so fucking self centered...let's just bomb the fucking infrastructure..abolish all law and order and then when the sacrifice is too much for us...leave the rest of the nation undefended so that they may be slaughtered by each other or Iran.

[Mountainman]

4. What do you propose instead?

[Sandpiper]

5. What do you propose?

Not saying it to be inflammatory, but how do you propose we go about withdrawing?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

9. I don't know..I just know that people will be slaughtered all the more

if we focus only on our losses and run. I know of nothing more unconscienable than to do that.

[MadHound]

19. C'mon, that was the excuse that was used to prolong Vietnam

And gee, we all know how that turned out.

Look, it is this simple. Any government that we set up is going to be considered illegal and illegit by the Iraqi people, and will be swept out of existence as soon as we pull out. The longer that we stay there, the more death is going to be dealt on both sides of this conflict, for our US troops will continue to obey orders and shoot to kill, dying for that sweet oil. The Iraqis, rightfully feeling that they have been invaded and occupied are going to continue to fight as long as we're there.

Thus, if we leave, we remove the enemy that the Irais are fighting against. Yes, there will be a short period of time, like there was in Vietnam, when a civil war will commence. But like in Vietnam, it will be relatively short and bloodless, and after that there will be peace. The sooner we bring this about by leaving, the better it is for everyone. We cannot in any way shape or form prevent this from happening after we leave, and the only purpose we accomplish by remaining is to steal more oil and rack up the body count.

It is time for the US to get the hell out of Iraq, NOW!

[Xithras]

25. The Vietnam /Iraq argument doesn't hold up

But like in Vietnam, it will be relatively short and bloodless, and after that there will be peace.

Big difference. The Vietnamese saw each other as one people with a common history and no prior hatred for each other. Since their only division was political, the removal of the political division allowed them to heal their collective problems.

Iraq, on the other hand, is populated by different ethnic and religious groups with a long period of hating each other and an even longer period of fighting amongst themselves. To make it worse, it's surrounded by nations who would LOVE to have political control over its wealth and oil, and who would readily arm and supply its fighting armies in the hopes that "their side" would win.

Hussein was a brutal, genocidal dictator, but he was smart enough to maintain a strong army capable of keeping his neighbors at bay, and a strong personality to humble those below him into acquiescence. None of that exists today, and the whole nation would fall to pieces as a result. What you would end up with, in the end, is another Somalia in the middle of the ME, with the nation divided up between warlords and armies, foreign powers controlling its resources, and its people powerless and abused.

[MadHound]

26. Amazing how all of those different ethnic and religious groups are uniting

To kick us the hell out. Sunnis fighting with Shi-ites, Ba-athists with Kurds, it is absolutely amazing. All united to get rid of the US occupation. Divisive indeed:eyes:

And if you look at your history, there were many countries around Vietnam who would have loved to have a crack at taking it over. After all, there was(and is) that lovely oil wealth in the Gulf of Tonkin. And the northern part of Vietnam was especially valuable, still is, considering it is the large leg of the Golden Triangle. Drugs sell friend, and if you've got them, other people want them.

And Saddam truly did a lot of humbling of his own people, especially since by law the entire civilian population was allowed to own and operate an AK-47. No trust there on Saddam's part, eh?

Sorry, but the Vietnam analogy is entirely apt, and I'm not the only one who thinks so. Generals, former administration officials, Congressmen, journalists, Vietnam vets, all of these people and more are noticing and commenting on the increasingly close paralells between Vietnam and Iraq. Perhaps it would help if you would read up on Vietnamese/American history. I might suggest Fire in the Lake, by Frances Fitzgerald, and the Politics of Heroin, by Alfred McCoy.

[Xithras]

30. I tend to take my opinions more from the Iraqi's than book authors

I work with quite a few Iraqi expats, some of which have only been here a few years. Most of them, even the ones who initially supported the war (primarily out of a hatred for Saddam), are FURIOUS with the US over the way the occupation is being handled and many want to see Bush tried for what he's done there. On the other hand, every single one of them has expressed the same fear that the US will repeat Vietnam and pull out of the nation when the losses get too high. In the words of the guy sitting four feet from me, who lost his sister to an American bomb in Baghdad in 1991, "It would be like Cambodia again, only much worse". These people don't take their opinions from newspapers, politicos, retired generals, or activists, but from the family members back in Iraq that they still speak with every week.

[diamond14]

33. ahhhh....this is nixon's Vietnam DOMINO theory...if Vietnam falls

the entire area will be affected....Vietnam will collapse and the entire region will be overwhelmed by communism....

[poe]

28. leave Iraq America we do not want you

the Iraqi people want the u.s. out. nuff said. so leave by plane, taxi, camel just go.
and then begin with massive reparations through various international agencies. the Huns cannot administer the village they ransacked. thanks for your efforts at reconstructing but we in Iraq have a higher per capita rate of Ph D's than McAmerica and are the most ancient and capable engineers on earth.
there is absolutely zero chance that Iraq could possibly be worse off than they are with the American bringing freedom at the end of a gun.
there is also zero chance that the the oil warriors will depart unless folks back in never-never land venture outside of their politics of comfort zone.
this whole argument is so tedious and framed within the modified constructs of "how could they get along without us now that we've destroyed their infrastructure and murdered their children." i guarantee you the death rate in Iraq will go down immediately when the Americans are gone.

[franksumatra]

29. but...but...they attacked us on nine eleven...cough...sputter...spit...

(sarcasm) I wish they'd just come out and say why they are really there, instead of all these official lies, that Americans lap up like milk.

How much worse could it be with the U.S. gone?

[eridani]

40. How do you know that?

It is our presence that is causing the problems. WE are the ones paying different factions to kill each other. Even if that were not the case, would you say that anyone who squeezes all the toothpaste out of the tube to put it all back in?

All we owe really is a buttload of money for reparations, which would still be way cheaper than imperial mass murder.

[donheld]

18. What i propose we do is appologize to the world

for invading over false pretenses, and over their objection. Then offer to pay to rebuild it. Yea i know i'm dreaming.

What should happen to me if i went over to another man's house broke in and distroyed his house and killed his his family members with no just cause. Should i be allowed to just walk away, say oops?

[yinkaafrica]

20. Allow the Arab/Muslim nations to replace us there

It would be in the best interest of Egypt, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, Pakistan, Palestine and the UAE to
stabilize Iraq. These countries understand the people and the area.
I am certain the EU would assist where needed.
The US should award Iraq some money. US contractors and suppliers
should not be allowed to bid on any contracts.
Iraq would end up with an Israel-hating government,
but as long as sharon/likud retain power, that is inevitable
anyway.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

24. That's pretty well what I would imagine

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

10. I'll overlook your name calling and respond even though your reading

abilities are questionable based on your last inflammatory paragraph.

SOME security force needs to remain in place. I never said we were the ONLY group capable of cleaning up Iraq...we are INCAPABLE of cleaning up Iraq.

That does not mean as the OP said...CUT AND RUN.

[Mountainman]

3. It is the winning that counts now.

Winning, what ever that means is what seems to be important to everyone. I don't know what winning means but I think it is supposed to represent a peaceful democracy in Iraq that is loyal to us. That will not happen so I say cut and run now.

[drdtroit]

6. Who will guard the oil ministry if we leave?

and whose going supply security for Haliburton's carpetbagging shenanigans? And if we stop expending rounds and losing helicopters, where will that money come from for the military industrial complex? Too much money involved (I can envision these criminals using front end loaders to loot our treasury) and what about liburatin' and dumb-ox-racy??

[smiley_glad_hands]

7. "You break you, buy it" the Pottery Barn rule.

So some have said like Collin Powell. On many levels, he is absolutely right. But what happens when the customer refuses to pay---and there is no way to make him? I'd be all for rebuilding Iraq and staying for a long term, but this gov't hasn't been up to the challenge and has relied on "faith" to make sure it all works out in the end. Faith without works is dead.

[paula777]

12. I broke a martini glass in Pottery Barn and they didn't make me buy it

[murray hill farm]

13. True..we broke it so we have to buy it, but...

we should leave now..today...get out! Yeah, we should pay for what we have destroyed there...but just send the money..and let the workers in Iraq do the rebuilding themselves..and we pay for it. We do not have to stay for the reason that we have to "buy it" and they workers in Iraq would then have long term jobs..and would probably do a better job of rebuilding their own country anyway...they would like to rebuild their own country and reclaim their own country..yeah, i know..when hell freezes over will this actually happen.

[Cyrano]

11. There's going to be a civil war there whether we stay or leave.

The Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds all hate each other. This is a country that was cobbled together by the British in the 1920s for their own purposes. The only thing that held it together was Saddam's brutal dictatorship.

Yes, Saddam has much blood on his hands. But I think that Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld et al have caught up with him. As long as an Iraqi civil war is coming whether we stay or go, let it happen without us. There's no reason to spill any more blood of young Americans in a hopeless cause.

On the other hand, perhaps we can find some super patriotic heroes such as Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Hannity, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rove, and so many others, who would like to go over there to help defend ... ummmm. I forgot. Exactly what is it we're supposed to be defending?

[franksumatra]

16. The Brits & Russians found out the hard way, you can't invade Iraq

Outside infidels are generally not welcome, but the PNAC plan is to westernize the whole Arab world, not a logical plan.

[PST]

14. if you don't mind a civil war breaking out?

absolutely nothing

[yinkaafrica]

21. The US needs to get the hell out of there, now

People who think we should stay need to enlist, now.

[Telly Savalas]

36. So we should just stick around for the next few centuries...

while the various ethnic groups work out their differences?

[wuushew]

15. I object to leaving before Vietnam syndrome besets the American public

Pulling out frees the military to go around beating other countries that Bush objects to. Since the death counter will be reset for each new theater of war, there will be no casualty fatigue at least as presented by mainstream media. All the while the number of civilians we kill will no doubt be high.

American policy will be like it was in the 19th century when people were excited to wage short duration yet unjust wars like the Mexican-American War or the Spanish-American War.

[rocktivity]

17. Sometimes cutting and running is the smartest to do

It doesn't mean you're weak, incompetent, cowardly, unpatriotic or "French." It means you're smart enough to stop wasting time, effort and resources on a lost cause. Besides, there's a saint who's supposed to take care lost causes.

But seriously folks, Bush needs to swallow his pride, admit defeat and ask the world for the help he needs. And if the Iraqi people are stupid enough to turn on each other once the troops pull out, that's their misfortune.

:headbang:
rocknation

[Xithras]

22. It would be a bloodbath

The Iraqi Sunni's fear the Shiite's, and the much more numerous Shiites are looking for revenge after decades of oppression and genocide. If we pulled out now Iraq would turn into a major battleground with the Iranians (who have been trying to maintain influence over the area for millennia) probably backing the Shiites, and the Saudis, Syrians, and much of the rest of the ME backing the Sunni. The Iraqi body count we have so far would be a mere drop in the bucket compared to those that would result from a full scale Iraqi war.

A full scale war also sets off other factors: How would Turkey, a secular nation with a major Sunni majority and a border with Europe, react to such a large scale war on their border. What would happen with Lebanon, a nation with a Shiite majority that is currently under the thumb of Sunni Syria? If the Shiites in Lebanon revolted, how would Israel, a nuclear nation that has invaded Lebanon before, react to the resumption of their civil war? Would any of the ME nations attempt to take advantage of the war and attack Israel?

And of course, there's the oil issue. Any large scale war in the ME is going to effectively shut off the flow of crude from the gulf. Big, slow oil tankers are easy targets for jets and artillery, and attacking an enemies oil pipelines cuts their income and fighting ability.

As bad as Iraq is, leaving it today would be far worse...not just for Iraq, but for the entire region and world.

[Cyrano]

23. Xithras, great analysis. However, I fail to see how our staying there will

change anything. We have too few troops with too little Iraqi support (not to mention too little Pentagon support) to affect anything.

Face it. We have an incompetent administration, up to their ears in shit, and with no clue what to do about it.

In the long (and even short) run, our staying there isn't going to make a bit of difference. The history of the middle east virtually guarantees a disastrous outcome. What makes you think that we can defeat the momentum of history and geography, not to mention human nature, tribalism and hatreds?

[Xithras]

27. The status quo isn't an option, but neither is leaving.

Look, I wasn't advocating that we support Bush, but I don't think that leaving is really an option because of the reasons I outlined above.

If I were President, here's what I'd do:

1. Divide Iraq up the same way the Allies divided West Germany after WWII, and allow the surrounding nations to provide peacekeeping troops for their areas. American troops could then be pulled back to protect only critical infrastructure, and could remain in reserve in case the local peacekeepers run into problems and SPECIFICALLY REQUEST our assistance. The area borders would need to be designed in a way that each one would be individually indefensible, and no nation should be given an area adjacent to their own borders.

2. I'd create a committee with multiple representatives of each ethnic group, each geographic area, and from neighboring nations, and allow THEM to plan Iraq's future. THEY should decide how a future Iraq is going to function, and what rebuilding should be done. There should be NO Americans OR Europeans on this committee...not even as "advisors".

3. The role of American troops during the implementation of this plan would be limited to rebuilding war damage, protecting important infrastructure, and training a new Iraqi military force. American troops and representatives would be explicitly prohibited from interfering with, guarding, or even offering advice to the people rebuilding the Iraqi political and governmental systems. Our role would simply be to ensure that, when the IRAQI'S are ready, that they have a functional country to run.

4. After that's done, we'll ensure that the armies from the neighboring nations leave as peacefully as they came. We need to make sure that Iran or SA doesn't try to "annex" the part of the country they were guarding. Our duty will NOT be to drive them out, but to offer support to the Iraqi army if they need it when retaking their own country.

5. After the last ME troops have left, we go too.

It could take years to do this, but if done right it would only take a fraction of the troops we currently have there, and at a much lower casualty rate.

[Cyrano]

31. Xithras. If I were the prez, I'd make you Secretary of State.

Unfortunately, the best layed plans of mice and men ...etc. We're talking about the most volatile area of the world where nobody plays by any rules for more than a week.

We can threaten and intimidate the countries surrounding Iraq. But their biggest problem is and will continue to be their internal differences.

To reinforce this point, I would point to our own country. Our Civil War ended 140 years ago. But anyone who really believes it's over is a fool. Are there really that many people who don't understand that the South rules this country today, (having spread their venomous "states rights" philosophy to the plains and mountain states)?

[Telly Savalas]

37. Couple o' questions:

What incentive would neighboring countries have to provide peacekeeping troops? That is, why should they want to bail us out?

Secondly, if the Sunnis, Shiites, etc. are at each others throats so much that a civil war is inevitable if we leave, then isn't it overly optimistic to assume that they'd all sit down at the table together to hammer out a plan for their country's future?

You have a lot of creative ideas here, but I feel that any plan that involves the continuation of U.S. involvement in the region is based to a degree on wishful thinking.

[poe]

32. nonsense

the situation will definitely be chaotic but a fraction of how bad it is now. death rate will go down immediately when Americans leave as it does everywhere when American forces depart (except when they leave a propped up dictator and proxy forces- as in allawi(sp?) who hasn't lived in Iraq for eons). the Huns cannot be trusted to administer the village they pillaged. the Iraqi people are the most ancient and capable of builders. the Iraqi people want the u.s. out by an overwhelming majority. this is a disgusting argument, and a little bit condescending to a people who have been massacred by the u.s. for thirteen straight years and pounded and dominated by the British for fifty years before that.
it is their oil. they may sell it as they wish or leave it under their sand. the industrial countries believe they have primacy to the bounty of the earth. there is also a very strong element of internalized racism that stains this entire so-called debate.
get out America it is their land and they want you out- it's that simple.

[poe]

34. would be?

the lasting effects of deplted uranium are how many kajillion years? the iraqi's would trust u.s. troops to do anything other than murder and torture? the u.s. military has zero record of doing anything positive anywhere ever. are we living in a dream with these kind of discussions which has the west's primacy coursing through it's veins and steering the discussion into a brick wall. do you want to see your tax dollars continuing to flow to KBR etc. c'mon this thing's so obvious.

[sweetheart]

35. yea yea... heard the same stuff about viet nam

civil war blah blah... cut and run means that the powers behind the
insurgency suddenly are put to it to make a government, and iran
and syria pull back as the battle is over.

Make no mistake that the insurgency is really a divice, much as
afganistan was used by the CIA to break the soviet empire, that iraq
and its insurgency is being supportd by secret services who want the
USA army tied down until bush gets out of office... for obvious
aggressive war crime reasons.

Viet nam seems to be recovering right fine, and surely iraq will as
well.

[Yupster]

38. We need to at least

get out the Iraqis who've worked with us first.

One Killing Fields a century is enough.

I don't want to learn about thousands of people lined up and having their heads sawed off in some Aztec-like ritual.

So if we cut and run, we at least owe it to those hundreds of thousands of people to get them out first.

[hollowdweller]

39. Doesn't matter what we do -It's a no win situation! If we stay there

for sure the war continues and we lose people. We pull out and the terrorists set up there like they COULDN't do when Saddam was in and we have an attack that originates in Iraq. There's not really any good choice. My choice would be immediatly pull out cause it's pissing our allies off, and use the $$ for real security like border and cargo.