phased pulout vs. Troop increase

So whats the the best strategy. It's obvious that 'stay the course' hasn't been working. I can see how the democrats think we should leave, but in all honestly i think if we start to pull out now, iraq is gonna explode. It's going to be a humanitarian crisis. I don't know if troop increase is the solution, but we can't just leave now. The iraqi government is simply too weak, the iraqi army too. Im a leftist myself and against the invasion of iraq in the first place, but goddamn if we leave iraq now it will be chaos.

Actually, a lot of dems have called for troop increases.. some even call for a draft.  Yeah, there are a few anti-war dems, but yeah.. there is no shortage of hawkish dems.

I say we work with Iraq's existing power structure and serve the Iraqi government/governments when they ask for help. Just so long as they permit some core libertarian principles such as free speech and some system of representation (the sheiks represent their people so they should have no problem with it). Then we can withdraw troops and sell them arms instead and reminisce endlessly over old war stories like those lucky vietnam veterans could.

surge method is idiotic. we have to redeploy. we can lay the foundation, help with a constitution and setting up the government and power system and whatnot, but they have to build the house. Things would be much easier if the dissenters used words instead of guns. the fact of the matter is iraq may simply not be ready to be a developed country.

>>1 "but in all honesty i think if we start to pull out now, iraq is gonna explode."

Iraq is gonna explode no matter what.  It is absolutely inevitable.  A surge of troops would mitigate violence for as long as the surge lasts--but no longer.  It is therefore a bandaid solution, and should be rejected unless it comes as a part of a more feasible long-term strategy.

W e  A r e  F u c k e d.  Someone really needs to get that across to the American people.  Iraq's government will have zero control over the northern and western areas of its country in the next 10 years, leaving the country ripe for terrorist camps.  Ironic, ain't it?

What exactly can more troops do that the current number is incapable of? Besides wasting money and resources.

We need to pull out before it's too late. If we stay inside Iraq and increase our troops, there's a higher chance of having to deal with unwanted babies, and then your life is ruined.

I think this war will nip America in the ass in the next 10 years,
It might even be the end of America

>>8
One can always hope.

Support my troops and their patriot missile launcher.

You have dems running both houses of congress. Go ahead. Run!

You will all sleep better knowing Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid are protecting you. Now all you need is a bitch president and everything will be Rosy.

There's something that's as good and just as realistic as a surge.

Wait for Jesus to fix it.

Fry: Fix it!
Fix it!
Fix it!
Fix it!
Fix it!
Fix it!
Fix it!
...
Fix it!
Fix it!

>>11
I know I'll sleep better with courageous people like you defending me from terrorists in Iraq.

Put up or shut up, internet tough guy, stroking your e-penis.

okay let's say the united states withdraw from iraq and shortly after the government gets toppled by the opinion of the majority and it becomes an "islamic fascist haven". what harm will that do the united states?

Uhhh they would probably stop exporting oil.

>>15
No, they wont, since they are in need of the dollars. But they wouldnt sell it on US terms, meaning that instead of reinvesting the petrodollars on wallstreet on american companies they would use the money to support their own population. And ze Amerikkans hate that (if Anon is in doubt about this, do some research why the US have a problem whith Venzuela).

>>14
WW3

The only way to get Iraq to a democratic system is to somehow 'educate the masses', and then you'd have to up the living standard before that. People really don't care much for democracy if it isn't gonna give them food on the table every day.

'Peace in Iraq' is screwed for the next 20 years at least, unless someone really smart (i.e. not a politician ^_^) comes up with some ingenious plan we haven't thought about yet.

The best USA can do is probably guarding the oil fields, and hope for the best. Or, get rid of their oil dependency, which isn't likely, even if the replacement was better.

Henry Kissinger himself has said that the war is now unwinnable under Bush's current definition of "winning" (a stable democratic government and and end to the civil war). If that bastard says it's unwinnable then it is.

>>19
I don't trust what Dr. Frogthroat has to say after Vietnam.  But yeah, he's probably right all the same.

>>20
He is a good diplomat, and knowledgeable about war, even if he is a shitty person and a criminal.


btw we tried the surge method in Vietnam too and all it did was cause more American soldiers to die. Basically Bush Administration got all these experts opinions and shit just to throw off and make it seem like they still have a shred of reason. HILARIOUS.

thank you, General Anonymous.