War in Iraq, What now?

  • News
  • Thread starter Artman
  • Start date
  • #1
1,490
24
On several threads, we've been discussing the war in Iraq. Many here think that this war is wrong and that it never should have been started. It's too late to not fight this war. That ship has sailed. Right or wrong the USA is involved in a war with Iraq.

So my question is this, What now? Should the USA stay and try to restore peace, should we just leave?

Please do not dwell on the past in this thread. THe USA is already involved, so what next? Let's be positive, what is the best course?
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
Gokul43201
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,051
18
Stick around. Try and get in NATO forces (UN Peacekeeping forces ??? :eek:) to share in the responsibility. (That's going to be a hard ask, tough.) Make sure role is mostly policing/military and the training thereof, and stay away from political interference. Establish border security. Try not to make Iraq the HQ for the Military in the Middle East. Kuwait is grateful (relatively) for the presence of the US Military, Iraq will be resentful of it.
 
  • #3
5
0
I think they should slowly remove US presence if possible. The Iraqi police will take the blows and the civilian population will no longer be able to blame a distant apache chopper for the latest carbomb. And maybe help the police.
But ofcourse, before they can slowly remove their troops there has to be some stability.... only the religious leaders could possibly bring some sense to these madmen.
 
  • #4
BobG
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
185
82
Middle East oil is vital to US (and world) interests. There's no way to throw Iraq into chaos, leave, and hope things work out for the best.

Once in, we have no choice but to stay until there is some way of maintaining stability without us. One side (Shiite, Sunni, or Kurd) has to be able to keep the others at bay one way or the other (politically or, more likely, by repression) before leaving even becomes an option.

The only other reason to leave is if a US presence is more disruptive than helpful. While a foreign military presence in a country is always disruptive, I think the chaos would be worse without us and it will be quite a while before that balance changes.

In any event, I doubt we'll be leaving a loyal ally when we finally do leave.
 
  • #5
member 5645
My list from another post about the things we could have done better in Iraq......
Many can still be moved towards.
Martial law and curfews from day one. Loosen restrictions as it becomes possible.

Secure emotional sites that are sure to incite the populous.Not all of them, but there needs to be a visual attempt.

US troops in the middle of Iraq, foreign nations on the outskirts doing perimeter control (where we have many of our guys now)No body bags in Europe means less problems with countries have their troops there. Not to mention, our troops are better equipped and trained than many of the smaller nations we have scattered about in hot zones. Uniformity of nations would go a long way. The contesting of American troops under British control, and vice versa, should have never come up, as it should have never been an option.

Hire Iraqis for as many busy work jobs as you can. Don't bring in bulldozers if you can put to work 25 Iraqi men for several days. Don't hire contractors except where it is needed (telecom jobs and what not).

**** Bremer. This guy was a pathetic administrator from the beginning.

Why weren't there mobile cell phone towers from day 1? 2 months in we ship them in? Cell communication, instead of driving messages back and forth and limited satellite phone access, would have made things move more quickly in the beginning.

Sistani is the man. This should have been an overwhelming thought, and he should have played a front roll in advising us and speaking often.

Go get that Iraqi girl (she is still alive, was posted a few days ago) with the tumors and give her free emergency help in the US. Send her back to Iraq for PR. We are not bad guys, but are sure not letting enough people IN Iraq know that.

No-bid contracts in Iraq? Have some common sense. It's a valid business practice, but Cheney, Halliburton. Should have never given the critics a chance to start the conpiracy theory machine.

Plenty of things have been done right, but this is a thread focuses on identifying mistakes, so they may be rectified where possible.
 
  • #6
member 5645
BobG said:
In any event, I doubt we'll be leaving a loyal ally when we finally do leave.

They'll be as loyal as S Korea, and depending on how we act afterwards more or less later.
 
  • #7
1,490
24
I'm liking this guys. Good positive responses.
 
  • #8
5
0
Dont mean to go offtopic, but wheres Adam?
 
  • #9
123
1
You guys are very pragmatic about Iraq and what to do with the problem we are facing.But remember White House is full of unstable individuals with big egos and they might launch yet another war with Iran or Syria.
 
Last edited:
  • #10
2,425
7
French opinion : thousand thanks to Gokul and BobG ! I deeply wish whichever winner will listen to your advices.
 
  • #11
1,490
24
tumor said:
You guys are very pragmatic about Iraq and what to do with the problem we are facing.But remember White Hous is full of unstable individuals with big egos and they might launch yet another war with Iran or Syria.
Future plans of the USA and Iraq could certainly come into play. It seems to me that you would not find this a suitable course. Do you agree with those suggested so far, or would you add or change some things?

Although I mentioned trying to keep this thread positive, you could certainly state items such as those above that you would not want to see happen and elelaborate on the consequenses. I believe this kind of opinion can aide in forming constructive thoughts on the subject.
 
  • #12
BobG
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
185
82
phatmonky said:
Hire Iraqis for as many busy work jobs as you can. Don't bring in bulldozers if you can put to work 25 Iraqi men for several days. Don't hire contractors except where it is needed (telecom jobs and what not).

This is a good idea. One of the biggest problems we've had is the inability to spend reconstruction money - mainly because it's hard to build things when the builders are ducking bullets. Until things are secure enough to get things moving, anything to reduce the high unemployment rate would likely reduce support for the insurgent groups. Roosevelt created a few 'busy work' groups during the depression that actually accomplished some positive work - it could help in Iraq, too.

While it may be using reconstruction money inefficiently, it can't be more inefficient than having to divert some of the money for security.

phatmonky said:
Why weren't there mobile cell phone towers from day 1? 2 months in we ship them in? Cell communication, instead of driving messages back and forth and limited satellite phone access, would have made things move more quickly in the beginning.

I'm kind of surprised this would be a problem. Satellite phones are a pretty big deal in that part of the world since there isn't nearly as big a ground cell phone network to compete with. Combination cell/satellite phones are available that about the same size as a cell phone, although more expensive (a few hundred dollars still?). Cell phone towers will reduce the cost of telephone communication long term, since satellite phone rates are generally higher than ground phone rates, but communications shouldn't have been a huge problem.
 

Related Threads on War in Iraq, What now?

  • Poll
  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
17
Views
3K
B
  • Last Post
7
Replies
158
Views
11K
  • Poll
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Poll
  • Last Post
6
Replies
148
Views
14K
  • Last Post
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • Last Post
3
Replies
52
Views
5K
  • Last Post
4
Replies
98
Views
12K
  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
2K
S
  • Last Post
2
Replies
30
Views
4K
Top