Here is something I've been wondering... The U.S. wants to transfer power to the Iraqis. They want the country to have a stable start and don't want to turn it over until their is stability. That all sounds reasonable to me. But... Since the U.S. occupation of Iraq, terrorists groups, and terrorists have been coming into Iraq from all over to fight the U.S. There are way more terrorist groups there now than there were when we took over the country. I agree it's a risk to let the Iraqi government start with countless terrorist groups running around in the country. Maybe the new government could wipe them out, but that's a pretty tall order for any government especially one that just hatched. So we don't want to leave the country while it's a new nest and breeding ground for terrorism. Yet, we also don't have the troops, intel and ability to wipe out all the terrorists. Have we not just either created a new center for terrorism in the middle east or guaranteed ourselves a very long-term occupation? It seems like we took out a horrible dictator and in return caused a huge influx of terrorists. Is that a gain for our country? What is the solution? There may be an easy answer to this that I overlooked. Eitherway I would love to hear other people's thoughts on the quandry.
WE put our hand in the wrong cookie jar. thats all, US thought they could pull off another Afghanistan, but forgot IRAQ is no pushover. and now ther paying the price. all 80+ billion of it.... and lets not forget our young soldiers
The 'trick' is to get the democratic Iraqi gov. up and running ASAP, and make certain it has the resources required to defend itself. Many Iraqis may not really care what happens to US troops, but it will be different when the targets are their own country and it's democratic gov, which will be the only targets remaining once we leave. I'm not entirely unconvinced that some of our decision makers aren't taking this opportunity to suck-in terrorists to have our armed and special forces, and ultimately Iraqi forces, fighting them instead of attacking our soft targets around the world. Cheney has elluded to as much.
The part about getting a new Iraqi govt. fight the terrorists is the trick of the matter. I just don't know how possible it is. I hope it can happen, and start happening soon. As for luring them all there to fight them in Iraq, that's definitely a possibility, but realisticly what are the chances of winning that kind of a fight? More terrorists will keep coming there as long as we are there fighting. If we kill one then another one will come and take the place. If we leave, and the new Iraqi govt. doesn't have success in getting rid of the terrorists that are ther, they will set up training bases and it will become a breeding ground. The thing that worries me is how tough it is weed out terrorists of an entire country the size of Iraq, and that's if there is total commitment to do so. It will be hard with the myriad of problems facing the any new govt. to concentrate enough time, energy, and manpower, to fighting the terrorist threat.
you are possibly right, if you arent careful, you kill one demon and several rush to replace it. unfortunetly bush hasnt been quite a good long term thinker, with the way things are going in aghfanistan, i believe we will be too involved with n korea by the time its too late for iraq
Up and running? Yes. But able to defend themselves? From this? We are the world's foremost military power, in full combat mode, and we can't stop this. What makes you think they will ever be able to stop what was started here with the invasion? The only hope is that the stimulus for this is our pesence, and removing that will eliminate the cause for resistance. Of course, to do that we would actually have to be hands off, and allow them the freedom we said we were fighting for, including if they choose to excercise that freedom in ways we don't approve. Short of that they will always be seen as a puppet for US interests, and the conflict will be ceaseless. In the meabnwhile, putting an international face on the reconstruction, and allowing them full freedom is the only way to resolve this, IMO. Right now, according to the residents of the Middle East, and echoed by the rest of the globe, we are the bad guys. If we make this a truly international action, representing no specific nation's interests or agenda other than Iraq's own, then those fighting against it would be seen to be fighting to further their own individual agenda rather than resisting US oppression, and that would make them the bad guys.
The bombings may stop. What would happen though to the terrorists already there. Would Iraq become a terrorist headquarters where they had free reign to train and recruit? We do know that there are more terrorists there now, what will happen once we leave?
It's unlikely the terrorists will send their elites out just to snipe some American soldiers. It's waste to use guys that can pilot a commercial airplane, who took years to be developed and cover themselves for traditional stealth operation in guerilla warfare against the American army. The terrorists that are attracted to Iraq and engaging in attacking the troops should proabably be the stupid but loyal ones in the organizations. As long as there is fights, there will be Iraqi casulties, with casulties some Iraqis would blame Americans for not leaving, and more hate towards America. The Iraqi war provides an ideal situation, broadly scattered Americans in large amounts in a foreign country, for the terrorist organizations to put their low quality manpower to use which are otherwise useless in traditional terrorist attacks. I'm not optimistic in reducing terrorists manpower and weaken their stealth operations because the army isn't fighting against the most dangerous type of guys that are hidden behind.
