Libertarians Offer An Iraq Exit Strategy

[The Duke]

I only read the first paragraph, but that's all it took to realize this is a stupid idea.  A full withdrawal is not a "strategy", its a retreat.  Despite the pained assertions by the writer, it is most certinly not feasible that Iraq could stand on its own two feet within a year.  I haven't heard one expert say it will be able to do so, Republican or Independent or Democrat, no one.

They can call this whatever they want, but in reality its a full blown retreat with a sink or swim attitude towards the New iraq.

[The Duke]

4)We have to create democracy in Iraq. (This argument was added after the others fell flat)  Whether democracy will prevail among people who didn't ask for it remains to be seen. But it is not the job of the US to overthrow every screwball dictator in the world and install a democratic government. The effort has cost us many lives and billions of dollars.

This is simply not true.  I quote to you from the President Bush's speech on , the night we began the attack on Iraq:

"Many Iraqis can hear me tonight in a translated radio broadcast, and I have a message for them. If we must begin a military campaign, it will be directed against the lawless men who rule your country and not against you. As our coalition takes away their power, we will deliver the food and medicine you need. We will tear down the apparatus of terror and we will help you to build a new Iraq that is prosperous and free. In a free Iraq, there will be no more wars of aggression against your neighbors, no more poison factories, no more executions of dissidents, no more torture chambers and rape rooms. The tyrant will soon be gone. The day of your liberation is near."

Democracy in Iraq was always a central goal of the invasion, and to say otherwise is to mistate the facts.

[The Duke]

4)We have to create democracy in Iraq. (This argument was added after the others fell flat)  Whether democracy will prevail among people who didn't ask for it remains to be seen. But it is not the job of the US to overthrow every screwball dictator in the world and install a democratic government. The effort has cost us many lives and billions of dollars.

This is simply not true.  I quote to you from the President Bush's speech on , the night we began the attack on Iraq:

"Many Iraqis can hear me tonight in a translated radio broadcast, and I have a message for them. If we must begin a military campaign, it will be directed against the lawless men who rule your country and not against you. As our coalition takes away their power, we will deliver the food and medicine you need. We will tear down the apparatus of terror and we will help you to build a new Iraq that is prosperous and free. In a free Iraq, there will be no more wars of aggression against your neighbors, no more poison factories, no more executions of dissidents, no more torture chambers and rape rooms. The tyrant will soon be gone. The day of your liberation is near."

Democracy in Iraq was always a central goal of the invasion, and to say otherwise is to mistate the facts.

I don't recall Bush saying that but if you say so I'll believe you, but the point remains that the Iraqi's didn't ask for this. Are they really better off now than before? The 20,000 or so who were killed by our bombs probably aren't better off. How many others were maimed or disfigured? Are they better off? How about those who had their homes destroyed? Are they better off? How about the people who live in constant fear of bombings  in a country which is constantly subject to attacks? Are they better off?

Yeah they show some Iraqi's on TV who say they appreciate our help. But how many other Iraqi's are running down the street with an AK47 yelling "death to the infidels"?  Those guys don't usually get interviewed on Fox news.

The overwhelming majority of Iraqis voted in the election, thus ratifying popular support for our objective.  I'd be willing to estimate that the safety of the average Iraqi is greater today than during the days of midnight raids and torture rooms, and that current US polict towards Iraq is safer for civilians than the 12 years of sanctions.

As for your suggestion that Iraq didn't ask for it, this is more than a little silly.  When you Presidential ballot looks like this:

[ ] Vote for Saddam
[ ] Death of my family

You don't often have your voice heard to begin with.

[The Duke]

The founders of our own nation faced a similar situation; support the declaration of independence and face death. The king wasn't at all fond of the colonists who wanted freedom. Yes we got help from the French and I'm sure the founders were thankful for it. But it was our war. An American (well future American anyway) wrote the declaration of independence and other Americans signed it. It would have been a different story if Napoleon wrote it. How would the founders have reacted if the French just came here and told us they were going to liberate us with or without our consent, and then set up a government for us modeled after their own?

Again, you work from the assumption that no one in Iraq wanted us there, which is not true at all.  You also work from the assumption that the philosophy on foreign affairs used by the founders is applicable today, which is also not true at all.  Finally, you work from the premise that the Iraqis were capable of defeating Saddam which again is simply not true.

The evidence that we are wanted there?  The Iraqi election turnout, which overwhelms any notion of Iraqi discontent.  The evidence that Saddam could not be overthrown by his own people?  The several failed coup attempts over nearly a quarter century.  The evidence that the world the founders knew has funamtenally changed?  The fact that Afghanistan, a country with a per capita GDP of just $800, killed more Americans on American soil on 9/11 than any foreign army since the War of 1812.

The founders of our own nation faced a similar situation; support the declaration of independence and face death. The king wasn't at all fond of the colonists who wanted freedom. Yes we got help from the French and I'm sure the founders were thankful for it. But it was our war. An American (well future American anyway) wrote the declaration of independence and other Americans signed it. It would have been a different story if Napoleon wrote it. How would the founders have reacted if the French just came here and told us they were going to liberate us with or without our consent, and then set up a government for us modeled after their own?

The big difference that jumps out at me on this is that our "king" was weeks away from us, and months away from actually piecing together a military force to come get us.  In the case in Iraq, Saddam and his goons were just hours away, and would snuff out a revolt in a heart beat.  This is why the Kurds lost so many people when Saddam gased them.  Fortunately, following the first part of the Gulf War, the Kurdish regions were under US protection (no-fly zone), allowing them to develop an autonomous region and prosper.

The current crop of rebels are willing to fight a much more powerful adversary, us. Was there no one there before brave enough to stand up to Saddam? or was there no one who had an interest in doing so?

BTW the new government controls the military and the police and allegedly has the popular support of the people, so why can't they take care of their own damn country? Who is there who has sufficient power to overthrow them?

The Iraqi government, while it has the support of the people, does not have the means (yet) to withsatnd the insurgents.  It takes time to build these kinds of isntitutions.  Public opinion does not translate into hard firepower.  No matter how popular the Iraqi government is, they will only be able to stand if they can go toe to toe on the battlefield with hardened Islamic radicals, which they can't do yet.  While the government does control the military and police, it should be noted that the overwhelming majority of these men are not even done with their rudimentary training (although the exact figures are classified, probably because of the fact that they'd show how few Iraqis really are combat ready).

David S - please stop being so logical. It only pisses people off!

Heh, a quote from John Dibble "Quiet! No questioning with your 'logic'

Yeah, I agree with David S, we gotta get them boys home.
No big argument from me, but I will say this: At the rate of Iraqis and Americans dying since we've been in the war, we've lost more people than if Saddam Hussein was in power right now. This alone should be reason to exit.

You are certainly welcome to justify this comment, as I doubt it could withsatnd very close scrutiny.