[expomeHattePe]

The United States will withdraw all combat troops in Iraq, after 7 years and 5 months from 20 March, from 2003 invasion of Iraq in August 2010. the withdrawl shows that U.S. troops lost the war with dignity. Americans pay a terrible price in this battle and failed to achieve their political goals and economic goals.
On March 20, 2003, the United States persisted that Iraq possessed weapons of massive destruction as an excuse and openly launched military operations in Iraq bypass the UN Security Council. However, it failed to find weapons of massive destruction and did not let the Bush administration feel ashamed, because at that time, Americans found a second disguise --- building Iraq into a model of democracy. Bush promised to give post-Saddam Iraq to bring freedom and security.
However, after the fall of Saddam Hussein, there are still continuing anti-US armed attacks, sectarian violence, so that the political situation in Iraq is extremely volatile, "security" has become a luxury, continuous exposure of prisoner abuse scandal also allow the "freedom" as a lie.


Obama Sets Timetable for Iraq Withdrawal, Calling It Part of Broader Middle East Strategy - washingtonpost.com

[astefecyAvevy]

Try telling that to him...

[abouthotels]

The United States will withdraw all combat troops in Iraq, after 7 years and 5 months from 20 March, from 2003 invasion of Iraq in August 2010. the withdrawl shows that U.S. troops lost the war with dignity. Americans pay a terrible price in this battle and failed to achieve their political goals and economic goals.
On March 20, 2003, the United States persisted that Iraq possessed weapons of massive destruction as an excuse and openly launched military operations in Iraq bypass the UN Security Council. However, it failed to find weapons of massive destruction and did not let the Bush administration feel ashamed, because at that time, Americans found a second disguise --- building Iraq into a model of democracy. Bush promised to give post-Saddam Iraq to bring freedom and security.
However, after the fall of Saddam Hussein, there are still continuing anti-US armed attacks, sectarian violence, so that the political situation in Iraq is extremely volatile, "security" has become a luxury, continuous exposure of prisoner abuse scandal also allow the "freedom" as a lie.


Obama Sets Timetable for Iraq Withdrawal, Calling It Part of Broader Middle East Strategy - washingtonpost.com

OK, for the sake of argument, let's just say we 'lost' in Iraq. What would have been different if we had 'won?'

[RBJamez]

OK, for the sake of argument, let's just say we 'lost' in Iraq. What would have been different if we had 'won?'

If we had won, there would be a stable Iraq, producing and exporting 5 million barrels of oil/day.

[TubOppomo]

If we had won, there would be a stable Iraq, producing and exporting 5 million barrels of oil/day.

Get out of town. You people would have chalked that up to "blood for oil" or "US imperialism."

[jakitula]

OK, for the sake of argument, let's just say we 'lost' in Iraq. What would have been different if we had 'won?'

*hugs Sunshine*

this be a hard question to answer, me friend.

what i can say, with conviction, be this;

the military, as far as i can see, did win the war. the part that we lost, i think, was the management 'o iraq after military victory was achieved.

i seldom am critical 'o Mr. Bush or his officers...but thar stewardship 'o Iraq after the fall 'o Mr. Hussein was a total disaster, one 'o the biggest foreign policy train wrecks in US history.

'tis good to see ye, lass.

- MeadHallPirate

[penpizdes]

By contrast, the US set up governments in the countries defeated in WWII and kept a military and economic presence for decades.

Which is no different from what would have to happen here, if libs had the belly for it.

[natahololll]

By contrast, the US set up governments in the countries defeated in WWII and kept a military and economic presence for decades.

Which is no different from what would have to happen here, if libs had the belly for it.

ahoy Revere, 'tis nice to meet you!

are ye sayin' that conservatives are willin' to keep a military and economic presence in Iraq fer decades?

i mean...would they be willin' to then raise taxes to actually pay fer such an endeavor?

also, whar in the constitution does it cite that such activities be sanctioned by our foundin' fathers?

- MeadHallPirate

[Mowselelex]

Technically speaking, the war ended and was won when Saddam was captured. What's ending now is a misguided occupation, a practice that should be ended in principle for developed worlds; occupations have nothing but bad results, at least modern ones. I suppose Roman occupations that enslaved the population and stole resources were quite successful.

[lizadax]

Technically speaking, the war ended and was won when Saddam was captured. What's ending now is a misguided occupation, a practice that should be ended in principle for developed worlds; occupations have nothing but bad results, at least modern ones. I suppose Roman occupations that enslaved the population and stole resources were quite successful.

ahoy Lesser Known, welcome to USPO!

i suppose thats one way 'o lookin' at it.

still...when ye bomb a country to smithereens whilst tryin' to assassinate thar leader...level all thar ministry buildings to rubble, thereby cripplin' thar infrastructure...destroy thar electric plants and water purification plants, i am not sure ye can just say, "okie dokies, good luck iraqi folks, we're outta here!"

- MeadHallPirate

[UlceskLialels]

ahoy Revere, 'tis nice to meet you!

are ye sayin' that conservatives are willin' to keep a military and economic presence in Iraq fer decades?

i mean...would they be willin' to then raise taxes to actually pay fer such an endeavor?

also, whar in the constitution does it cite that such activities be sanctioned by our foundin' fathers?

- MeadHallPirate

Was it necessary to raise taxes to put Japan and Europe back together again? Or did the resultant commerce from their once again vital economies help lift those of the rest of the world.

The early Americans used the millitary, or the threat of it, to enforce their free trade requirements all the time.

[Ayyfjicg]

Was it necessary to raise taxes to put Japan and Europe back together again? Or did the resultant commerce from their once again vital economies help lift those of the rest of the world.

The early Americans used the millitary, or the threat of it, to enforce their free trade requirements all the time.

That and for self defense which is the only time the military should be used.

[onlineslotetes]

..... I suppose Roman occupations that enslaved the population and stole resources were quite successful.

Successful for the Romans, the enslaved populations may have had a slightly different view.

[tsovimnpb]

Lesser Known, et al,

I agree.

Technically speaking, the war ended and was won when Saddam was captured. What's ending now is a misguided occupation, a practice that should be ended in principle for developed worlds; occupations have nothing but bad results, at least modern ones. I suppose Roman occupations that enslaved the population and stole resources were quite successful.

(COMMENT)

The was was won on the defeat of hostile force. The Regime Change was concluded with the capture of Saddam.

What is in question is the Post-Conflict phase. Certainly, the US invested a tremendous amount of money, for which it will not see a return on its investment. The benefit (for what we did) is suppose to meet or exceed the probability that no cause will arise that will threaten the US. If the cost of the Post-Conflict phase exceeds the cost of the invasion itself, then we did not choose wisely. If the Post-Conflict Phase results in an environment that is equal to or less than that which it was before the invasion; then it wasn't worth it.

Most Respectfully,
R

[Joesred]

Successful for the Romans, the enslaved populations may have had a slightly different view.

And when corruption weakened the Romans, how did that turn out for them?

Same story happens to pretty much all governments eventually. Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.

[Jourgenz]

It was never winnable. We should have not gone in there in the first place. We should just leave completely and let them keep killing each other until there is nothing left, then we can go back in and take their oil.

Seems like much more cost effective strategy to me. Problem is Bush and Cheney wanted to loot the treasury for their Haliburton and Blackwater friends....and they did a good job making them rich and we got to pay for it.

[CitsMoise17]

Those not suffocating on delusion would do well to consider and remember the things which set in motion one of the most egregious errors in the history of the United States. The attacks of 2001 and the mass fear, terror, and confusion that ensued created the perfect atmosphere to implement a plan none but the most hawkish, ignorant, and short-sighted would've followed under ordinary circumstances. A lack of contingency planning, bolstered by politically contrived goals which changed in order to appear to support our presence there, led to a multi-sided conflict far beyond "war."

“Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship. ...voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.”
- Hermann Goering

[valensds]

While a stable parliamentary Iraq is best, overthrowing a fascist dictator like Saddam is a good deed in itself.

If only we could had focused more on Afghanistan at the time rather than switching over so quickly to Iraq.

The Iraq was instigated for the wrong reasons, with wrong ulterior motives, and done at the wrong time; an illegal war and one built on lies but it would hypocritical to have a blanket ban on all US military adventurism in terms of liberating countries from dictators who hadn't attacked us, since our military is still present advancing our own practical interests all over the world.

Since we throw our weight around, it is our obligation to stick up for democracy, but that doesn't mean building an empire.

[ENGINESSQ]

The United States will withdraw all combat troops in Iraq, after 7 years and 5 months from 20 March, from 2003 invasion of Iraq in August 2010. the withdrawl shows that U.S. troops lost the war with dignity. Americans pay a terrible price in this battle and failed to achieve their political goals and economic goals.
On March 20, 2003, the United States persisted that Iraq possessed weapons of massive destruction as an excuse and openly launched military operations in Iraq bypass the UN Security Council. However, it failed to find weapons of massive destruction and did not let the Bush administration feel ashamed, because at that time, Americans found a second disguise --- building Iraq into a model of democracy. Bush promised to give post-Saddam Iraq to bring freedom and security.
However, after the fall of Saddam Hussein, there are still continuing anti-US armed attacks, sectarian violence, so that the political situation in Iraq is extremely volatile, "security" has become a luxury, continuous exposure of prisoner abuse scandal also allow the "freedom" as a lie.


Obama Sets Timetable for Iraq Withdrawal, Calling It Part of Broader Middle East Strategy - washingtonpost.com

The withdrawl of troops does not mean a loss. Thats ridiculous.

Saddam and his regime are gone, Iraq has a new constitution, which they voted on, they have an elected government, and two years ago they said they were ready to stand on their own and take care of their own problems. Thats when the agreement was signed between the US and Iraq regarding the deployment of US troops.
US troops are leaving because the mission is accomplished.

[incizarry]

If we had won, there would be a stable Iraq, producing and exporting 5 million barrels of oil/day.

Can't agree more.