What would happen

1. Killing will stop and Iraq's goverment will gel (right!!)
2. All hell would break loose, Factional, even Regional War.
3. Something in between


What One Reporter Thinks Would Happen if U.S. troops Left Iraq

July 20, 2007
By Brit Hume

Withdrawal Consequences

John Burns of The New York Times — who is considered the Best Print reporter on the beat in Iraq — disagrees with Democrats and other administration critics who think a U.S. troop withdrawal would make things better in Iraq.

Burns told Charlie Rose — "It seems to me Incontrovertible that the Most Likely Outcome of an American withdrawal any time soon would be Cataclysmic Violence."

Burns says the Sunni minority has the most to Lose.
He said one senior American official told him that Sunni Vice President Tariq al-Hasimi — when told of the serious possibility of a withdrawal — said — "Then WE WILL ALL BE SLAUGHTERED."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,290063,00.html



The VIDEO with Charlie Rose and the very knowledgeable John Burns, on-site, discussing withdrawal: Recommended.

http://www.charlierose.com/shows/2007/07/17/1/a-conversation-about-iraq-with-john-burns-of-the-new-york-times

CR's previous interview Videos with him also at link above.
-
-

It's their country, if they can keep it. If not, then not.

http://www.storeappeal.com/images/CUTE_KITTENS023.JPG

This is Iraq

http://www.acceleratingfuture.com/michael/blog/images/Nuke2.JPG

this is iraq without Us troops

Except the first kitten is also on fire.

If there is this huge tension that could lead to civil war, why would staying there make any difference? We will have to leave eventually, and that's when the struggle for power will erupt.

If no political solutions are advancing, then we are just acting as an obstacle for a humanitarian crisis that we started.

And Iraq doesn't have nukes.



Anyway, believe it or not I do think US troops should remain in Iraq. At a steadily decreasing pace.


It's all up to the Iraqis in the end. If they want peace and stability, they work for it, not the US, not Iran,not Syria. If they want to keep killing themselves, as harsh as I may seem, then we can not do it for them.

We can guide them, assist them (We, as in, everyone else), but we can't do it for them.

This is exactly what Cheney warned us about.

Here is what Cheney said in '92:

"I would guess if we had gone in there, I would still have forces in Baghdad today. We'd be running the country. We would not have been able to get everybody out and bring everybody home.

"And the final point that I think needs to be made is this question of casualties. I don't think you could have done all of that without significant additional U.S. casualties. And while everybody was tremendously impressed with the low cost of the (1991) conflict, for the 146 Americans who were killed in action and for their families, it wasn't a cheap war.

"And the question in my mind is how many additional American casualties is Saddam (Hussein) worth? And the answer is not that damned many. So, I think we got it right, both when we decided to expel him from Kuwait, but also when the president made the decision that we'd achieved our objectives and we were not going to go get bogged down in the problems of trying to take over and govern Iraq."

You're the US. You're "responsible" for the well-being of the World Order, remember?



Now, here's the thing. Why not focus on the actual Iraqi secuirity, and equip and train them properly for them to govern their own nation?

Also, target the youth. It is NECESSARY to get the youth of Iraq against extremism.


Convince the youth not to join these little weakass terrorist groups.


That will, at least, damage the terrorists' ability to recruit.

If there is this huge tension that could lead to civil war, why would staying there make any difference? We will have to leave eventually, and that's when the struggle for power will erupt.

We're still in South Korea protecting the south from the civil war that the North Koreans want to start ...and would the minute we leave!

We will be able to leave Iraq when the people of Iraq decide that they don't want terrorists and extremists running their nation. Until that happens, who can protect them from those extremists?

Or do you want to just open the gates and let the people be taken over completely by the extremists?

If no political solutions are advancing, then we are just acting as an obstacle for a humanitarian crisis that we started.

An obstacle? Ya' mean by not allowing the terrorists and extremists to take control of the nation and the people?

And would you say that same thing about Korea? ...just let the hordes of the North swoop down on the almost defenseless south?

Baron Max

iraq is a shit storm now i don't really see that it could much worse than it already is

iraq is a shit storm now i don't really see that it could much worse than it already is

You're not very knowlegeable, then, and without a very good imagination. Try to think about it just a bit, perhaps you can see through the rose-colored glasses that you wear.

Baron Max

This past week in Iraq no one was killed. That's good. :bravo:
The surge is working. Iraqis are turning in terrorists. Another year and we should be in good shape.

Liberals want us to lose Iraq and the '08 election. Ugh. :mad:

You're not very knowlegeable, then, and without a very good imagination. Try to think about it just a bit, perhaps you can see through the rose-colored glasses that you wear.

Baron Max

no i know if we leave it will get worse but it cannot increase in badness that much you their is an absulote level of anachey that it can get to and its gett near their i feel the violence cannot increase by a full order of magnitude and also how is say iraq is a shit storm looking at it with rose colored glasses

no i know if we leave it will get worse but it cannot increase in badness that much you their is an absulote level of anachey that it can get to and its gett near their i feel the violence cannot increase by a full order of magnitude and also how is say iraq is a shit storm looking at it with rose colored glasses

I can't read your post. Try using English, which means using commas and periods and such proper grammar ...I might be able to read it and respond.

Baron Max

This past week in Iraq no one was killed.

What planet are you on? Or do US soldiers count as the only people in Iraq?

iraq is a shit storm now i don't really see that it could much worse than it already is

I don't know of what you definition of a shit storm and getting worse is, but here are some facts, the surge is working, the death tolls are down, and here are the numbers to prove it.

http://icasualties.org/oif/IraqiDeathsByYear.aspx

Iraqi deaths by month.
2006

Jan.783, Feb 865, Mar.1121 Apr.1038, May.1120, Jun.888, July1287, Aug.2966, Sep.3543, Oct.1541, Nov.1865, Dec.1752.

2007

Jan.1802, Feb.3014, Mar.2984, Apr.1826, May.1987, Jun.1345, July,1748, Aug.2074, Sep.849, Oct.531.

The death toll in August are down by 32%, and the deaths in September are down by 41%, and in October they are down by 36% so

The death tolls will probably reach zero by election day. How nice.

If the US leaves.. It'll be like Afghanistan again. After the Soviets left.

I don't know of what you definition of a shit storm and getting worse is, but here are some facts, the surge is working, the death tolls are down, and here are the numbers to prove it.

http://icasualties.org/oif/IraqiDeathsByYear.aspx

Iraqi deaths by month.
2006

Jan.783, Feb 865, Mar.1121 Apr.1038, May.1120, Jun.888, July1287, Aug.2966, Sep.3543, Oct.1541, Nov.1865, Dec.1752.

2007

Jan.1802, Feb.3014, Mar.2984, Apr.1826, May.1987, Jun.1345, July,1748, Aug.2074, Sep.849, Oct.531.

The death toll in August are down by 32%, and the deaths in September are down by 41%, and in October they are down by 36% so

the surge is bullshit it is not a sustainable effort and therefore irrelevent

the surge is bullshit it is not a sustainable effort and therefore irrelevent

Now how about some proof other than your opinion, you predicted that the surge wouldn't even get off the ground, and it has, you claimed that it would accomplish nothing, well it appears that you are wrong, now post some fact not your opinion.

Deaths among U.S. troops and Iraqi troops and civilians are down dramatically,and Sunni's are moving their support to the Government, the coalition forces are arresting and killing more terrorist than ever before, so some fact to back you doom and gloom.

Now how about some proof other than your opinion, you predicted that the surge wouldn't even get off the ground, and it has, you claimed that it would accomplish nothing, well it appears that you are wrong, now post some fact not your opinion.

Deaths among U.S. troops and Iraqi troops and civilians are down dramatically,and Sunni's are moving their support to the Government, the coalition forces are arresting and killing more terrorist than ever before, so some fact to back you doom and gloom.

it is getting things done something which i never denied but it will fail in the long because it is not sustainable we just don't have the troops to make it so