This one ought to have some good debating going on. As we all know United States forces as well as others are in Iraq fighting the war on terror. Barrack Obama will pull the troops out in his presidency. I ask you should they stay in Iraq or be pulled out?
The invasion of Iraq was flawed from the start. Our troops were sent in under false pretenses, they were not properly equipped, and there was no strategy in place for a prolonged occupation.
Despite everything, our troops have performed brilliantly. I blame our civillian leadership for failing to learn from history. In our history, every time we have gone to war out of defense, we have achieved victory.
Compare Vietnam and Iraq:
Vietnam-Invaded under questionable pretenses
-Propped up an unstable government
-Didn't have clear objectives, know exactly who our enemy was, therefore no cohesive exit strategy
-Our involvement escalated exponentially, spreading our military resources thin
-Defeated by unconventional warfare despite technological and numerical superiority.
Iraq (Gulf War II) -Invaded under questional pretenses
-Propping up an unstable government
-Don't have clear objectives, don't know who our enemies are, no clear exit strategy
-Our involvement has escalated exponentially, spreading our military resources thin, leaving us vulnerable to terrorist attacks elsewhere
-Have already sustained sigificant losses in resources and manpower despite technological and numerical superiority
Unfortunately, we created this mess, so we have to clean it up. We need to finish training up the Iraqis so they can take over their own country.
Our exit strategy should be to incrementally withdraw troops from the interior and put them on the borders, to prevent Al-Qada, Iran, and Syria, from taking advantage of our withdrawl. By guarding the borders, we can give Iraq the time it needs to become self-sustaining without increased external pressures. Then we go home.
