Reply #15: I am undecided on the issue of immediate withdraw.

[Selwynn]

These are the ways I am torn:

One one hand:
We devastated that country, therefore we're responsible for restoring it. I can consider whether our continued military occupation is worse for the the Iraqi people, but I cannot accept any scenario in which the United States is not forced to pay for rebuilding what we destroyed.

So that's the first point: even if military force should be withdrawn immediately, I cannot support anything that says the US should no longer be responsible for paying for the rebuilding of Iraq.

Still on the same hand, I am unsure of what will happen if the United States immediately and unilaterally withdraws. Will it leave a power vacuum with dooms that country to far worse civil war, destruction and suffering. Will it allow for other hard line oppressive terrorist or tyrannical regimes to come to power and once again enslave the people?

So that's the second point: is our immediate withdraw really best for the Iraqi people. That's what I care about most. We fucked them, and now I feel we are absolutely responsible for making restitution in whatever ways we can. If leaving now means dooming Iraqi people to greater suffering or worse oppression or violence, then I do not support immediate withdraw.

Now, on the other hand:
It is entirely possible that our presence there, even in the times where it is well intentioned (what I mean by that is, even when we are doing things like rebuilding or training teachers, or some of the other positive things that are trying to be done) is not helpful, does not make Iraqi people's lives more safe, or less oppressed by only makes the violence and destruction worse.

So that's the first point on this side: our military presence directly hurts the aim of making things better for the Iraqi people.

In addition, its also possible that our current administration cares so little for actually helping the Iraqi people really than we literally have no real good intentions there, little or nothing positive is even seriously initiated, and most of that is for show.

So that's the second point on this side: if our presence in Iraq really does absolutely nothing positive to rebuild or repair or improve, then we should immediately withdraw.


My own feeling at the moment are sort of like this: the United States should transition military force to a United Nations led peace keeping force made up of many nations, none of them the United States (because more countries will cooperate if we're not there). But the United States should still be responsible for the costs and struggle to repair all the horrible tragic damage that was done to the people of that country. We should have teams of builders and volunteers, not corporations awarded lucrative government contracts, but workers working through the United Nations committed to the rebuilding process.

But because I myself am torn on what I feel is a really complicated issue, I'm not as furious as some of you are that not every democrat in politics is immediately ready to say we should cut and run.