MVWRX

iTrader: (1)

I'm curious of what people here think. I know most of us want to withdraw, and a timetable makes sense to me. But in order to be fair I haven't read the article yet, I want to set up this thread with as little partisanship as possible.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...ngress_iraq_14

MVWRX

iTrader: (1)

...this part is funny though...

VIBEELEVEN

iTrader: (2)

I personally don't think you can announce something like that publicly. It's completely detrimental to the mission.

What's that supposed to mean? They want an immediate pullout?

MVWRX

iTrader: (1)

It means we can't just keep doing what we're doing...pretty common venacular for that. And almost everyone I talk to (conservative and liberal) agree that something needs to be changed.


Also, we've used time tables for withdrawal in other conflicts haven't we? Why would it be detrimental this time? It seems like a 'planned phase withdrawal' wouldn't give away enough info to create a disaster to me.

VIBEELEVEN

iTrader: (2)

The enemy you're fighting is different than in conventional warfare.

MVWRX

iTrader: (1)

True...I'm just trying to think through this. What advantage are we giving the insurgents by saying that by a certain time we will have the same # of forces as now, but they'll all be Iraqi. It's just a deadline that could possibly motivate the Iraqi forces to get up on their s*** before we leave.


Plus, I assume that most of the insurgents are attacking purely to take a stab at 'evil America', so if we leave couldn't it possibly reduce the number of Islam-extreamists who want to go to Iraq to be insurgents? I think they'd have less motivation to make IEDs and such if they couldn't target the US like they can now.

psoper

So maybe its about time we tried something other than conventional tactics against them.

And I don't mean nukes, I mean psy-ops going back after hearts and minds, and reasoned exit strategies- making a well publicised draw down in terms of uniformed "on the ground troops" while bolstering the SF presence- but only for specifically targeted super law-enforcement type anti-terrorist work.

Expand our on the ground human intelligence capabilities, so we can focus on real terrorists and not be set against every self-respecting citizen who might be motivated to protect their family and country.

And present a stronger non-military internationally supported reconstruction and public policy support structure, try to show at least a touch of compassion and empathy for the innocent thousands who have been victims of both the previous dictator and the collateral damage of our liberation efforts.

And probably not all at once, but something like that phased in over 6 months to a year could turn the whole thing around.

"Staying the course" really seems to be making things worse as time goes by, clearly it isn't the way to make anything better.

Salty

iTrader: (14)

Holy **** I agree with you. On the basic idea at least...

Let's start the withdrawal of troops gradually to show the Iraqi troops that we've pulled out the ratchet from the toolbox in order to take off the training wheels.

Then utilize psyops and other civil affairs means to reassure the public of our withdrawal and the fact it’s time for them to take the torch. Let them know although our troops are leaving and will eventually be gone, we will still have a presence until that point and that our Spec Ops counterparts we be there for training, counter operations and security of officials for awhile.

Although there’s a lot more to it and I can go on and on, I think doing this would boost morale on every front.

It has to be done eventually so why not do it while everyone is impatient?

MVWRX

iTrader: (1)

Ask your republican politicians that.

VIBEELEVEN

iTrader: (2)

http://www.senate.gov/general/contac...nators_cfm.cfm

1reguL8NSTi

I agree with you, something does need to change. On another note though, you can't let a date on a calendar determine when you've accomplished your mission. Think of all the wars the U.S. has been in. Every war with the exception of Vietnam was deemed complete when we satisfied our pre-war plan (i.e. WWII=liberate Europe and force surrender of Axis forces/Panama Invasion=capture Noriega/Desert Storm=force Saddam from Kuwait). We were successful at all those goals and left when we were complete. If we quit and withdrawal simply based on a quantitative calendar date then we run the risk of creating a breeding ground (even moreso than now) for terrorists that our children will have to go fight.

1reguL8NSTi

I agree with him too. That's what I've proposed the whole time. The Iraqi's want a nation run by Iraqis, not by American MPs.

lojasmo

new boss, same as the old boss

psoper

And our presence over there makes this better because........?

lojasmo

Our presence over there didn't make anything better. Our presence made things deomonstrably worse