Iraq - is our debt there paid?

[Berkut]

I was thinking about this the other day when I heard there was another spate of bombings.

I think we've pretty much fulfilled our obligation to Iraq created, IMO, when we went and kicked out Saddam.

That does not mean I think we should bail, by any means. It does mean that if they fail, I won't feel like it is *our* failure, but rather *their* failure.

From here on out, as far as I am concerned, our investment in Iraq is and should be based strictly on standard enlightened self-interest. Iraq should not be considered any differently than any other country, except insofar as it presents different opportunities.

Thoughts?

[Valmy]

I think we are obligated to stay and help the government until they ask us to leave.  My understanding is they want us to leave eventually so I think our interests and our obligations coincide.

Despite the recent string of bombings I am confident the war in Iraq is coming to a successful conclusion from our perspective.

[Josquius]

I hear nothing but conflicting stories about the Iraqi army's abilities.
Some say its a load of incompetant nothings that will fold within days of the US leaving and on the other side some seem to think its better than many of their neighbours. Both seem likely untrue to me but if its more towards the latter then its safe to go.

[viper37]

I was thinking about this the other day when I heard there was another spate of bombings.

I think we've pretty much fulfilled our obligation to Iraq created, IMO, when we went and kicked out Saddam.

That does not mean I think we should bail, by any means. It does mean that if they fail, I won't feel like it is *our* failure, but rather *their* failure.

From here on out, as far as I am concerned, our investment in Iraq is and should be based strictly on standard enlightened self-interest. Iraq should not be considered any differently than any other country, except insofar as it presents different opportunities.

Thoughts?

let's say you buy a new house, from a contractor.  The contractor comes and start excavating.  He proceeds with the foundations, lay the square of the house, then leave halfway through it.  He leaves you all the materials you need, but he simply goes on the another job.  You have a house.  4 walls and a roof.  He says it's not his fault if he can't finish the work, there has been constant interruption from your neighbors and he has busted, way busted the allocated time to build your house.

Are you satisfied that it is not his fault for not delivering a complete project?

[Berkut]

Viper, I don't think your analogy holds to what we have done in Iraq.

More like we built them 14 different incredible mansions, and they keep blowing them up. At some point, the latest mansion was done, and they tell us they love it, and would like us to stop with the mansion building.

This analogy sucks. Building a house isn't much like trying to create a stable democratic state.

Anyway, I am not suggesting that we leave at all - we will continue to spend billions on Iraq for a long time, and we should - but we should do so because it is in *our* interests to do so, rather than because we are obligated to do so.

They have been given a golden opportunity. Perhaps it will work out in the long run, perhaps not. We should suport them as much as we can, but in he end all we can do is lead the horse to water, build him a well, draw the water up for him, and even cool it off.

The horse still has to drink.

I am surprised that you would take the attitude that we have not spent enough blood and treasure in Iraq. How much more must we spend before we have spent enough?

[KRonn]

I think that we have some responsibility, and/or vested interest, in at least short term help working with the Iraqi govt in combatting violence and other agendas which may come up over the next few years or more. I feel it's in our interests to assure that other groups or nation's agendas, which we and the Iraqis have been opposing, do not find it easy to pursue their goals just because the US is drawing down its commitment there. Iraq turning into a civil war, or ruled by more extreme tyypes, or even the extreme of becoming a failed state serves us badly, even if we feel that we've done our part.

However, after some time, not sure how long, a few years or up to a decade, depending on conditions, once the Iraqis are quite stable then it's really up to them. And I think they've made a lot of gains to be very stable now, though we don't yet know what other groups may be waiting for opportune times as the US leaves.

[derspiess]

I was thinking about this the other day when I heard there was another spate of bombings.

I think we've pretty much fulfilled our obligation to Iraq created, IMO, when we went and kicked out Saddam.

That does not mean I think we should bail, by any means. It does mean that if they fail, I won't feel like it is *our* failure, but rather *their* failure.

From here on out, as far as I am concerned, our investment in Iraq is and should be based strictly on standard enlightened self-interest. Iraq should not be considered any differently than any other country, except insofar as it presents different opportunities.

Thoughts?

Agree on pretty much every point.

[Razgovory]

I didn't think we owed them anything in the first place.

[Grallon]

... our investment in Iraq is and should be based strictly on standard enlightened self-interest.

  Not those of the iraqis of course.  As a matter of fact, I don't recall the iraqui people asking for the help of the US to get rid of Saddam either.  Instead of trying to export democracy you people should focus on the home front where right wing conservative nutjubs are arming themselves.




G.

[Valmy]

As a matter of fact, I don't recall the iraqui people asking for the help of the US to get rid of Saddam either.

The question is not what the Iraqi people did or did not want us to do six years ago but what they want us to do now.

[Strix]

How long did it take the US to end occupation of other places where they helped to reconstruct their societies e.g. Japan, Germany, Mississippi in comparison to Iraq?

[Zanza]

How long did it take the US to end occupation of other places where they helped to reconstruct their societies e.g. Japan, Germany, Mississippi in comparison to Iraq?

Occupation in Germany de jure ended in 1955.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generalvertrag_Treaty

[grumbler]

let's say you buy a new house, from a contractor.  The contractor comes and start excavating.  He proceeds with the foundations, lay the square of the house, then leave halfway through it.  He leaves you all the materials you need, but he simply goes on the another job.  You have a house.  4 walls and a roof.  He says it's not his fault if he can't finish the work, there has been constant interruption from your neighbors and he has busted, way busted the allocated time to build your house.

Are you satisfied that it is not his fault for not delivering a complete project?

Move over, Marti, there is a new King of the Irrelevant Analogies! 

I cannot even tell from this whether the US (either the US govt or the US people) is the buyer or the contractor!

Never do analogies, Vipe.

[grumbler]

  Not those of the iraqis of course. 

  Of course not.  People acting in the interest of foreign countries at the expense of the interests of their own country are called "traitors."

As a matter of fact, I don't recall the iraqui people asking for the help of the US to get rid of Saddam either. 

Poor memory?  There were lots of Iraqi exile groups calling for the US to get rid of Saddam, as well as groups in Iraq who lived outside Saddam's control.

Instead of trying to export democracy you people should focus on the home front where right wing conservative nutjubs are arming themselves.

Already done, though enforcing gun laws is not competitive with foreign policy, so your "instead" makes zero sense.

[grumbler]

Occupation in Germany de jure ended in 1955.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generalvertrag_Treaty

And, de jure, it was a UN, not US, occupation.