Thread: Iraq War -Should We Stay or Should We Go?

Bring them home.

The man they say directed the attack was supposedly in Afghanistan.

Bush talked about going to Iraq during the debate with Gore. 9/11 gave him the opportunity to go to Iraq and he took it. It's his vendetta, not ours. Let him die for it if it's that important to him, but bring our troops home.

The damage done to the reputation of the USA can be laid at his feet alone. We had the world behind us after 9/11 and he flipped them the bird to do as he pleased. That is his legacy. He earned it.

One religious sect against another, one tribe against another... whether we stay or go that will not change. The choice to quit killing each other lies with them not us.

WorriedAmerican wrote:

we need to do what Ron Paul says, close ALL 700 bases over seas in other countries and put them here on the border or to take care of our own problems, like gangs taking over cities and towns across this country.

There are some serious flaws in what you're proposing. The Army alone has more than 100,000 soldiers and 28,000 civilians stationed around the world protecting our interest. Furthermore, the active duty military is currently forbidden from undertaking law enforcement duties by the federal Posse Comitatus Act. Utilizing some military on the border should be acceptable because it involves national security. However, unless we're under martial law, the military cannot be used in the interior. Heck, I believe the Army base in Ft. Hood, TX., has two or three divisions. Why not just use them on the border (a division has 10 to 15 thousand soldiers).

If we close all our Army bases down and bring all our soldiers home, a lot of folks are going to lose their jobs and the potential to protect our best interest and nation will be greatly diminished. What about the tens of thousands of military service members and civilians stationed at our Air bases throughout the world (Air Force, Navy, and one USMC). Okay, so will just fire most of them too (can't support having them all home). What about the aircraft? Do we just push those into the sea? Perhaps we should also quit deploying our Naval ships and submarines too because we can't deploy our ships without the drydock and fueling capabilities our bases abroad offer. Let's not even consider the hundreds of thousands of Americans that will lose their jobs. We can't have all those folks just sitting around on their butts in the U.S collecting a paycheck. Plus, how are we going to drydock all those ships and subs in the U.S. (we don't have the facilities for such an undertaking. Up to 50% of our Naval ships are deployed at any given time (actually underway or homeported overseas). Essentially what you're talking about is the complete decimation of our military.

Under the suggested scenario, it won't be long before we're at the complete mercy of any superpower that assumes the roll we're currently playing. When the king of the hill steps down, there is going to be another king - that's just the nature of things. That's right, we'll no longer be considered a superpower, and we'll no longer be able to protect our interest abroad. What do we do when China turns into the global bully? Remember, under the plan you propose we've already destroyed most of our military machine because we couldn't afford to sustain it, and our capabilities have been degraded to point where it would be impossible to set up a defensive posture against a true superpower.

Also, consider this - our inability to protect our best interest will open the doors for every nation to advance and/or create a nuclear weapons program. Who is going to stop them? Who's going to stop the more advanced countries from selling to rouge nations or terrorist? Certainly not us because we'll no longer be a player. What about our agreement to protect Japan? Guess that will be out the window too, which means they'll have to immediately start rebuilding as a military power. Yep, they'll have to obtain nuclear capabilities too because China has them. What about our responsibility to our NATO allies? I guess we'll just leave them flapping in the wind also because we can't offer much protection or support if we no longer have accessible routes to move military hardware, fuel, weaponry, etc. Additionally, without our bases we'll no longer have fast-strike capabilities or staging locations. Yes, we can even forget our friends in Isreal because we can't offer them a lot of support or protection from our perch in the United States (guess Iran can go ahead an wipe them off the face of the planet). Moreover, our biggest accomplishments achieved during the Cold War will be for nothing because Russia will longer feel the need honor our nuclear missile drawdown agreement, especially after we remove our United States Air Forces In Europe (USAFE) command.

Closing all our abroad bases down would create a very volatile world, much more volatile than what we have today. Furthermore, it would effectively remove our status as a superpower. Not that that isn't bad enough, it would also cause a chain reaction that will force hundreds of thousands of American to lose their jobs in military support, military forces, manufacturing, and distribution. I'm sure there are other associated problems that I haven't even thought of that would come from removing all our bases overseas.

No response?

I read an article - somewhere - that said the British had withdrawn their troops from an area they 'protected' and left it in the hands of the Iraqi soldiers and police.

Their commander said the attacks had gone down by 90%. Now this could make the argument that our presence (and England's) is what is causing the attacks and the bloodbath.

Two soldiers my husband talked with said they were fighting Iraqis who just wanted us gone from there.

What if that is true?

Do I believe the General - I certainly question him. He is under the command of the President. I don't think he would say only what the President wanted him to say.

This President wanted a war with Iraq - why? Not because he tried to kill his Daddy. I am sure there are people all over the world that have contracts out on his Daddy.

It could be they wanted a place for military bases in the ME - Saudia Arabia doesn't want us there any more and Turkey won't let us do military attacks from our bases there.

It could be because Saddam had already made contracts with other countries to sell his oil to them - and he was making noises about dealing in Euros - this would leave the friends of the Bush family out in the cold.

It could be they didn't want the Iraqi oil to hit the market in order to keep the price up.

It could be they just wanted a war so the military manufacturers could get richer and richer.

It could be all of the above - could be something else.

Two things I am as sure of as I am of anything else in the world - it wasn't because the planners actually thought he had WMD or was a threat to America and it wasn't because they wanted to bring democracy to Iraq.


Let me see - yes I think we can bring our military home.

The idea that 100,000's of people will loose their jobs, I doubt. But even so, do we continue to spend all that money just so those people can have a job? I really don't believe that is true. That's a pretty poor reason.

We are not protecting American's interest over there. We might be protecting some corporation's interest - some oil company interest - America and American's interest - no.

If Europe needs defending - The EU is a very strong entity - it can provide protection for Europe - it isn't our job.

So do we keep those bases going over there just to provide storage for all those planes, ships, etc?

Bring them home, mothball the ones that won't be needed, keep the others in working order here.

As for our playing the role of superpower - that's a joke - and much of the world knows it. They let us play that part. It brings lots of money into their economy to have our bases there.

Whether we have all those bases and personnel there or not, we probably are not the world's superpower - at any rate, we will not be for long. So do we break this country economically, continue to fill it with the poor and criminal who sneak in here - and face China on that level? Why don't we consider taking those resources that are being used to keep the bases there, build up our economy and our country and face China on an equal economic footing.

When someones talks about our being a superpower - remember we are playing that role on China's money. That's some kind of superpower.

Remember under the plan, we are not only bringing our military home, we are bringing our army of agents who interfere in other country's business and creates lots of unrest in the world. Perhaps the world would not be such a volatile place without our pot stirring there.

We owe nothing to NATO. Those countries have as much resources as we - let them handle NATO themselves, or we should only provide our fair share - nothing more.

We can keep enough military power and resources to have a fine army, an army that can protect this country. Maybe we can actually provide them with the equipment they need and not send them without bulletproof vests and armor plating for their vehicles.


Bring the army home, put it on the border. Some of those supposedly 100,000 civilians who will supposedly loose their jobs can be put to work enforcing interior immigration laws, transporting illegals to the border, etc., etc.

I think building a strong America is much more important that keeping military bases in the far corners of the world to protect the interest of corporations. In the long run, a strong America is the most cost effective thing to do, the best protection for America and it's people.

We really need to stop thinking in the terms of cold war cliches and think in terms of reality. Right now, if China cut off our funding, we are a gone goose anyway.

So when people tell you we need to continue doing thus and such - remember that's what we've been doing - How's it working for us?

Bring 'em home. Stopping putting American taxpayer dollars in the pockets of military manufacturers. That's what it's all about.

I understand where you are coming from MW. Believe me, I used to think the same way before I weened myself off of FOX news!

But why is it OUR responsibility to take care of the rest of the world? Our country's responsibility is to "We The People" here at home. The American tax payer. Not the military industrial complex. We have bases in some parts of the world where they don't even want us there anymore.

Our NATO allies can take care of themselves. NATO was formed during the cold war to defend the US and W. Europe from attack from the communist nations. With the fall of the Soviet Union, NATO achieved it's mission.

But then, NATO moved from being a defensive alliance into an offensive and interventionist alliance. Concerned with economic and political troubles. Did you know that NATO membership demands a minimum level of military spending from it's member states? Even when there is no longer an external threat? When the member states can't meet these expensive requirements, that's when the US Govt. steps in, offering aide and subsidized loans for military equipment they don't even need! What a racket! It's nothing more than corporate welfare for the military industrial complex at our expense!

A major issue not being discussed regarding this war is what it is doing to our economy. Why would you support draining our economy by maintaining hundreds of military bases around the world? Nothing you mentioned in your post will even matter once our country is bankrupt. And once we are bankrupt, how are we going to protect ourselves from people who seriously wish to do us harm?

I'm just learning all of this myself from reading Ron Paul's writings, and personally, I think the most important part of our national security is a healthy economy. But the way things are going now with the war, we are headed toward a major financial disaster. I don't know about the rest of you, but THAT scares me more than the terrorists!

The dollar is crashing because foreigners no longer want to invest in money that is losing its value. Did you know the dollar has fallen below the Canadian dollar and about to go below the Australian dollar as well?

What about people about to retire, expecting SS and medicare? Meanwhile, we're handing out checks to illegals, outsourcing jobs, selling our infastuctures, and fighting wars financed by foreigners. The rug is being pulled right from under us and most Americans don't even know it. I had to laugh at a question asked at one of the GOP debates they had over the summer. They asked each candidate their opinion about the state of our economy. ALL of them said it was FINE! Except Ron Paul. I think there might have been one other - Tancredo? Not sure.) Maybe someone else knows.

Anyway, our National Debt is increasing an average of 1.47 BILLION PER DAY! How can we continue to go on like this??

I think our military has already met their objectives of the Iraq War. We ousted Hussein, and had free elections. MISSION ACCOMPLISHED. They can leave with their heads held high into the loving arms of their families. Now it's up to the Iraqi Government to do the rest. In my opinion, it has now become more of a foreign aid boondoggle to rebuild an entire nation thanks to "us taxpayers", while our own national borders continue to remain ignored.

I used to confuse military strategy and military budgets as our strength. But I'm beginning to understand that it's our economy! That's why we are a SUPERPOWER. But if we don't elect someone who will change the direction of our current foreign policy and implement sound fiscal responsibility, I fear we are in for a very rude awakening.

I believe this is ALL being done intentionally under the guise of national security and using our fears and patriotism to blind us from the bigger picture. One of the scariest things I heard - can't remember where now -but it was on talk radio where an attorney who has multi-billionaire clients, said that his clients are all heading out of the country. They believe that the United States will cease to exist by next year. How frightening is THAT?? I try not to even think about it....

Iraq War Profits
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_q ... ar+Profits

chloe

That's how I wanted to say it - thanks.

How can we be called a superpower when we are operating on money borrowed from China - the soon to be, (if not already) superpower militarily as well as economically.

I have an idea - let's bring all those people home, military and civilian. Keep enough of both to maintain a strong military - I am certainly in favor of that. But we need one that is really strong - not financed by our enemy - and if we think China isn't our enemy - we had better think about it some more.

The more you think about it - it makes so much sense. It just took someone who had the gumption to speak it out loud. We have been so brainwashed over most of our entire lives to the idea that ' we must protect our interests overseas'. We my interests are not the interest of big corporations or military manufacturers.

I read that each family of 4 in the US now owes $20K for the Iraqi war. Think about that now. Every day the interest is building on that $20K as well as every day millions more is being borrowed to spend on the war.

It has to stop - and busines as usual and slogans won't get the job done.

I think the idea of 'we'll be open to attack, etc.,' is just scare tactics. We are more vulnerable to attacks right now than ever.

You guys need to look beyond Ron Paul's talking points and understand the reality of what you're suggesting, which by the way makes very little sense. The world is not full of heart candy and lollipops. There are some very conniving and extremely evil folks out there that would immediately take full advantage of the situation should it materialize as you propose. Trust me, Ron Paul is not the second coming and he won't be able to protect our world-wide interest or country with his "writings."

Chloe24 wrote:

I understand where you are coming from MW. Believe me, I used to think the same way before I weened myself off of FOX news!

Sorry, I don't watch FOX news.

Originally Posted by MW

You guys need to look beyond Ron Paul's talking points and understand the reality of what you're suggesting, which by the way makes very little sense. The world is not full of heart candy and lollipops. There are some very conniving and extremely evil folks out there that would immediately take full advantage of the situation should it materialize as you propose. Trust me, Ron Paul is not the second coming and he won't be able to protect our world-wide interest or country with his "writings."

Chloe24 wrote:

I understand where you are coming from MW. Believe me, I used to think the same way before I weened myself off of FOX news!

Sorry, I don't watch FOX news.

I see a MAJOR flaw in the idea that to "stay" is what we must, regardless, because we must etc.. or whatever else someone says.

See, you first must work off the premise that the INITIAL invasion was just. It wasn't. The WHOLE SCENARIO was trumped up. All of it. So, to stay is just promoting the dishonest agenda, while at the same time going broke. Not sure if anybody notices but we are gonna hit a HUGE recession soon. Now you see why there was no declaration of war. It never was meant to be won, but to be occupied. So, the reasoning is.. well, we are there - we are already committed.. so lets keep with the bad diagnosis. Now Iran is in our sites. Why? Well, we just INVADED a neighboring country for NO reason and we are staying. When over 70% of the citizens of the occupied land want us out, uhmmm lets go. I think we should make concessions for those who need safe harbour. That is understandable. But how many lives are you will to see dead, America lives. Nobody else. Not 'our' friends over there. Our dead, Americans. How much money are willing to spend. With the country going broke, you think they are gonna put money towards that fence? Hell no! shit, the businesses will keep using the illegal labour because of the recession - Plus, those illegals will now be working for LESS money... Americans will be out of work.

I am sure we all have had that friend who had children and was in a horrible relationship. but, they stayed in it for the childrens's sake. Everyone was miserable and the harm to the children was magnified for being in a destrcuctive and unhealthy relationship. Yet, who is to say "what could have been" if the relationship ended and the children were given an environment outside of the chaos and badness... So, my point being. As Ron Paul has said "if you wrongly diagnosed, you change the treatment.." or something like that. Why do you think, Ron Paul has garnered MORE military donations that any other candidate and almost as much as all GOP put together? They don't want to be there, his message resonates with them, current and veteran...

I am NOT willing to pay my taxes to build bombs to blow up bridges, then use my tax dollars to repair those bridges, WHILE our bridges and OUR infrastructure is going to shit.

Do we have the money? NOPE! We are borrowing billions a day.

Also, with our troops in over 130 countries and then someone saying "protecting our interests" is rather telling. Protecting our interests. See, this is the globalists - America is right mentality. Keeping the "others" in line. Who is getting out of line? Why do we have bases in Japan? Why do we have bases in South Korea. they do NOT want us there.

We all worry and fret over the boogymen the MSM gives us everyday. Perhaps it IS time to come home. All of our troops. Maybe it might actually be good. Some here are SO against it. But why? Really think about it. Its fear of an enemy. An enemy that is always, somehow, given us by those elites who desire more of your money to fund one thing or another.

I can ONLY imagine how more well each of us would be if we didn't have to fund almost a trillion a year in foreign interventions and entangling alliances... if we didn't have to pay a "federal income tax".. all that extra money. The dollar would be verry strong, and we could afford things...
Maybe it would give "other" nations the incentive to protect themselves and not have us nanny everyone.

Who else has bases ALL OVER THE WORLD? What other superpower? None.

Also, one needs to understand WHY we have those bases. During the world wars, we set up bases to maintain order after the wars.... but instead of pulling back after all was in order, we stayed. Now we have somehow come to the conclusion that we need to be there. There are NO threats in Japan. Why are we there? For China? A boogyman.. Why are we having missles stationed in Europe.. Russia. Another boogyman.. etc.. The ELITES have made us afraid of everything and everyone and we still pump money into the government to fund these extravagent occupations.

Simple question. How would like Mexican bases, or Italian bases, or South Korean bases on OUR soil??? Yet, the mentality is - we need are troops/bases over there because of the scary enemy! Nonsense.

The same people here who probably love all the espionage don't believe we would know if "something" is up prior to any invasion by another country to one of our investments??? we would, THEN we act. We don't spend hundreds of billions year after year after year.... for NO reason. There is NO deterent to these bases. None.

I WOULD ONLY agree to it, if the host country paid for our occupation.
If Japan wants to pay us to have air bases there, then great - that is okay with me.

BUT THE ONLY real threat I see, is America and its intent on bombing everything in the Middle east for our "interests", which in term will devalue our dollar further and put american soldiers in bodybags....

The good thing about what Ron Paul say is FRIENDS & TRADE WITH ALL, NO ENTANGLING ALLIANCES... I wonder how much a way that would go. Probably do much better than changing perception than at the end of a gun.

Why do great empires end?

If you can say we are not following in the once great empires of this world, over the centuries, footsteps.. I would like know. We are stretched way to thin mainintaing to far from our borders, bringing in non-natives (illegal immigration and huge amounts of legal immigration), over taxation, and a devaluation of the currency. All empires have ended thus.

Well first of all it I think the surge ended the "war" phase. We are now into the regional stability phase. We need to leave some Americans there until the Iraqi government is more self sufficient and competent. I talked to a vet who came back from Iraq, and he said the biggest problem is state department personnel do not want to go there and help the Iraqis set up a well functioning bureaucracy! If they would do that then we could have all our troops back in a couple of years except for a few thousand military advisers.

So my bottom line is, send State Department people there and bring back our troops!

I wonder how the US gov't is going to help Iraq maintain a functioning gov't, when they do not run a functioning gov't themselves