Troop Withdrawal
The Republicans have frequently suggested that we should never have any kind of timetable for troop withdrawal because, as John Boehner suggested recently, terrorists will simply sit back and wait until we have left and then attack.
This piece of reasoning has never sat well with me.
Firstly, it is unclear exactly where this post-withdrawal attack will be directed. Is Boehner talking about an attack on the forces or an attack on the USA? The plain fact is, that in either case violence against Americans is less likely with the troops removed from Iraq.
Iraq is clearly experiencing some form of civil war, and the regular violence is sometimes sectarian and sometimes directed specifically at U.S. troops. If we were to withdraw the troops that would remove one of the targets of violence and, of course, end the troop deaths. This is not to say that the sectarian violence wouldn't increase, it is likely that it would, but it would undoubtedly be perpetrated by both sides.
As for an attack on the United States, only a woefully uninformed stupid person would think that we are making that less likely by remaining in Iraq indefinitely.
There are no good options in Iraq (it's the reason we said the war should never have been started!) but a gradual withdrawal may be the best of a bad lot. Pulling out immediately and staying indefinitely are both bad choices. If we wait for the 'perfect time' to leave it will never come, and, sadly, neither will the perfect time to begin a gradual withdrawal.
Removing the troops will likely lead to an increase in violence and the main victims of which will be the Iraqis. For this we should beg their forgiveness. It is, after all, the Iraqi's who have suffered the most during this whole sorry four years and will continue to, long after we have given up.
This piece of reasoning has never sat well with me.
Firstly, it is unclear exactly where this post-withdrawal attack will be directed. Is Boehner talking about an attack on the forces or an attack on the USA? The plain fact is, that in either case violence against Americans is less likely with the troops removed from Iraq.
Iraq is clearly experiencing some form of civil war, and the regular violence is sometimes sectarian and sometimes directed specifically at U.S. troops. If we were to withdraw the troops that would remove one of the targets of violence and, of course, end the troop deaths. This is not to say that the sectarian violence wouldn't increase, it is likely that it would, but it would undoubtedly be perpetrated by both sides.
As for an attack on the United States, only a woefully uninformed stupid person would think that we are making that less likely by remaining in Iraq indefinitely.
There are no good options in Iraq (it's the reason we said the war should never have been started!) but a gradual withdrawal may be the best of a bad lot. Pulling out immediately and staying indefinitely are both bad choices. If we wait for the 'perfect time' to leave it will never come, and, sadly, neither will the perfect time to begin a gradual withdrawal.
Removing the troops will likely lead to an increase in violence and the main victims of which will be the Iraqis. For this we should beg their forgiveness. It is, after all, the Iraqi's who have suffered the most during this whole sorry four years and will continue to, long after we have given up.
posted by Sparx at 07:08
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home