The Future of Iraq
Predictable? Not So Much
Ray Mechmann
Issue date: 3/11/09 Section: News
The change at hand on the parts of both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, was the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq. This was due primarily to its unpopularity with the American people, who saw the causes for invasion as unjustified. In President Bush's defense, Republicans cited not only the successful take-down of Iraq's radical dictator Saddam Hussein, but also the "emergence of a democratic government to replace [Saddam's] regime" - another key objective to the aforementioned Iraq Resolution.
After an arduous two years of back-and-forth criticisms between Republicans and Democrats regarding Iraq, the American people cast their votes on November 4, 2008, and Barack Obama was named Bush's successor as Commander-in-Chief. The fate of the country and the lives of many would lie in his hands. But what was the new President going to do? Would he follow through with the 16-month withdrawal plan he had so vigorously supported on the campaign trail?
After convening with the Joint Chiefs-of-Staff, the wave of reality washed away these prior plans. The 16-month plan for withdrawal was considered a dangerous move, something that would put innocent civilians in Iraq at risk. The substitute was to keep 35,000-50,000 troops in Iraq until 2011 - not as a matter of opinion, but as a matter of necessity.
What was perceived by many to be an unnecessary troop presence in Iraq quickly became vital to the protection of thousands of Iraqi men, women, and children. Iraq is still in a state of instability as it slowly transitions from a dictatorship to a democracy; it is a state in which it is too vulnerable to defend against the threats of Al Qaeda. Troops will remain simply because Operation Iraqi Freedom is not yet completed.
Indeed, a great number of troops will begin their departure home in August of 2010, as per President Obama. But the combat seen by U.S. troops is, by no means, at an "end" as the President has quoted. These additional troops will remain because the terrorist groups of Iraq are likely to continue shedding innocent blood - something from which the U.S. will not back away and must act against.
This is why the 2011 full-withdrawal date is puzzling to many people. Many wonder how we can be sure that Al Qaeda and its allies will not still be a risk in and after 2011.
Quite frankly, we cannot. For it is not solely the Iraqi government and military who should determine when U.S. troops leave; but the presence of these ruthless terror groups must also be considered before a full withdrawal is made. Can a date, truthfully, be chosen ahead of time?
It is not often, that the U.S. considers any of its enemies to be "predictable." The happenings in the years to come of terror groups like Al Qaeda, are anything but predictable. Can we afford to treat them as if they are?
After an arduous two years of back-and-forth criticisms between Republicans and Democrats regarding Iraq, the American people cast their votes on November 4, 2008, and Barack Obama was named Bush's successor as Commander-in-Chief. The fate of the country and the lives of many would lie in his hands. But what was the new President going to do? Would he follow through with the 16-month withdrawal plan he had so vigorously supported on the campaign trail?
After convening with the Joint Chiefs-of-Staff, the wave of reality washed away these prior plans. The 16-month plan for withdrawal was considered a dangerous move, something that would put innocent civilians in Iraq at risk. The substitute was to keep 35,000-50,000 troops in Iraq until 2011 - not as a matter of opinion, but as a matter of necessity.
What was perceived by many to be an unnecessary troop presence in Iraq quickly became vital to the protection of thousands of Iraqi men, women, and children. Iraq is still in a state of instability as it slowly transitions from a dictatorship to a democracy; it is a state in which it is too vulnerable to defend against the threats of Al Qaeda. Troops will remain simply because Operation Iraqi Freedom is not yet completed.
Indeed, a great number of troops will begin their departure home in August of 2010, as per President Obama. But the combat seen by U.S. troops is, by no means, at an "end" as the President has quoted. These additional troops will remain because the terrorist groups of Iraq are likely to continue shedding innocent blood - something from which the U.S. will not back away and must act against.
This is why the 2011 full-withdrawal date is puzzling to many people. Many wonder how we can be sure that Al Qaeda and its allies will not still be a risk in and after 2011.
Quite frankly, we cannot. For it is not solely the Iraqi government and military who should determine when U.S. troops leave; but the presence of these ruthless terror groups must also be considered before a full withdrawal is made. Can a date, truthfully, be chosen ahead of time?
It is not often, that the U.S. considers any of its enemies to be "predictable." The happenings in the years to come of terror groups like Al Qaeda, are anything but predictable. Can we afford to treat them as if they are?