View Poll Results: How will it end?

Voters
76. You may not vote on this poll
  • US leaves because security problems are resolved & Iraqi govt is stable

    24 31.58%
  • US leaves because the American public tires of war spending and/or casualties

    36 47.37%
  • US leaves because the Iraqis tell us to split

    16 21.05%
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 54

Thread: How will the Iraq War end?

  1. #1
    Former Staff Senior Contributor Ironduke's Avatar
    Join Date
    02 Aug 03
    Location
    Arlington, Virginia
    Posts
    10,132

    How will the Iraq War end?

    This question was posed by a professor of mine in 4867W US Foreign Policy toward the Middle East. Thought it might be worthwhile to repost the class poll here.

    Regarding the third option, the US and Iraq are currently negotiating the Status of Forces Agreement and the Strategic Framework Agreement. The Iraqi government is currently requesting that the Status of Forces Agreement have language that mandates:
    • the withdrawal of all US forces by December 31, 2011
    • all US troops off the streets of Iraq by June 30, 2009
    • Iraq may not request an extension
    • US cannot attack neighboring countries from Iraqi soil

    What do you think is the most likely end to US military involvement in Iraq?

    Please keep the discussion reasoned and respectful.

  2. #2
    Senior Contributor Yusuf's Avatar
    Join Date
    26 Dec 07
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    2,121
    Dont know which way to vote. The American people are already tired of the war. Iraqis probably want the Americans out, but still are not capable enough to hold their country together.
    Dont see the first option in the near future. If America was to leave Iraq now, I would see a civil war between the Shias and Sunnis and add to that AQ making it its base during the chaos. Iran would then start fishing in troubled waters and then the Turks entering Kurdistan.

    Right now its better the Americans stay in the mess they started.

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    05 Sep 07
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    193
    #2, and then the Civil War will start and the blood-bath will be FAR worse than now.

    Al-Sadr will end up at the top of the heap.

    John

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    11 Jun 08
    Location
    new delhi
    Posts
    268
    a few years or decades of american security and control can do nothing to negate and repress the centuries of hate among the kurds, shias and sunnis in the region . iran and iraq fought an active conflict for nearly a decade; wounds take time to heal only i think the americans are not going to be able to dedicate that much time.this war is going to end as a fiasco. i hope i am dead wrong for the sake of all the people of iraq.

  5. #5
    Patron
    Join Date
    26 Aug 08
    Posts
    193
    The US forces are never going to leave.... atleast not by 2011...

  6. #6
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    20 Jun 07
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia.
    Posts
    2,578
    The War has already ended, what is going on now is an Insurgency. But they will be out of there by 2011. The Brits have manage to stabilise Basrah.

  7. #7
    Former Staff Senior Contributor Ironduke's Avatar
    Join Date
    02 Aug 03
    Location
    Arlington, Virginia
    Posts
    10,132
    Quote Originally Posted by Chaobam Armour View Post
    The War has already ended, what is going on now is an Insurgency. But they will be out of there by 2011. The Brits have manage to stabilise Basrah.
    By war, I mean major US military involvement.

  8. #8
    Military Professional sappersgt's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 Mar 06
    Location
    Latitude 38 Longitude 112
    Posts
    4,118
    Quote Originally Posted by Mercenary View Post
    The US forces are never going to leave.... atleast not by 2011...
    Another Korea you think?
    Reddite igitur quae sunt Caesaris Caesari et quae sunt Dei Deo
    (Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's and unto God the things which are God's)

  9. #9
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    20 Jun 07
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia.
    Posts
    2,578
    Quote Originally Posted by sappersgt View Post
    Another Korea you think?
    From what Barak Obama is saying it may be sooner rather than later.

  10. #10
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    19 Feb 06
    Location
    Brooklyn, New York
    Posts
    791
    My guess the end will be very random. Either we completely pull out and everything becomes honky dorry more or less. With Iraq becoming a major oil supplier etc, helping prices crater further.

    Or we get out and in 3-9 months the country collapses embroiling the region in a severe power struggle. Sunni's supporting Sunni's, Shia's supporting Shia's ergo Syria/Iran/Saudi/Egyptian backing for multiple sides with a continuously fed bloodbath until some faction wins out. I wouldn't even mind Iran going in since it would destabilize it to such a degree that it might suffer the same fate. Ergo absorbing a country at civil war
    spreads it to the country that absorbed it, like a virus.
    Originally from Sochi, Russia.

  11. #11
    Senior Contributor Dago's Avatar
    Join Date
    23 Feb 06
    Location
    San Diego, Califonia
    Posts
    1,031
    Anywhere from a Islamic republic with Iran support. From ongoing civil-war for control. Or by some means the current political system remains intact and avoids a civil-war. Regardless violence will increase. And when time comes, and people realize that the political system is currupt you will see a greater degree of violence and this is non-aq, yet everyday iraqis. Either it will tremble fast. Or it will tremble slow. Either way it must tremble before it reaches of its doing that platue.

  12. #12
    Global Moderator Defense Professional
    Join Date
    30 May 06
    Posts
    1,030
    the iraqi govt seems to have a view that will be challenging for Obama.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2...section=justin
    Last edited by gf0012-aust; 17 Nov 08, at 08:22.

  13. #13
    New Member
    Join Date
    02 Jan 08
    Posts
    17
    The seems to become and endless war. The liberation of people who doesn't want to be liberated at all is a difficult task....

    So, let them kill eachother instead of our troops. We are sacrificing soldiers, but none (or to few) progress is made.

  14. #14
    Former Staff Senior Contributor Ironduke's Avatar
    Join Date
    02 Aug 03
    Location
    Arlington, Virginia
    Posts
    10,132
    Some recent news. If this deal goes ahead, there would be a major change in the role the US plays in Iraq coming very soon.
    Iraq cabinet backs US troops deal

    The Iraqi cabinet has approved a security pact with the US governing the future presence of 150,000 US troops in the country, officials have said.

    Under the deal, US troops will withdraw from the streets of Iraqi towns next year, leaving Iraq by the end of 2011.

    The decision will need to go before Iraq's parliament for a final vote.

    America's National Security Council welcomed the cabinet's vote, saying it was "an important and positive step" towards stability and security.

    The pact is necessary to determine the role of US military forces in Iraq after their UN mandate expires on 31 December 2008.

    In October, Iraq sent a new round of suggested changes to the draft Status of Forces Agreement (Sofa), to which the US responded.

    Washington had previously said the pact was "final" and could not be amended.

    The UK government, which has 4,100 troops in Iraq, is waiting for the US-Iraqi pact to be approved so they can use it as a template for their own bi-lateral deal.

    Deal struck

    As the Iraqi cabinet met on Sunday, two bomb attacks - in Baghdad and Diyala province - killed at least 18 people and wounded many more.

    The cabinet approved the pact after a two-and-a-half hour meeting, government spokesman Ali Dabbagh said.

    All but one of the 28 ministers present had voted in favour of the pact, he added, according to the Associated Press news agency.

    According to Mr Dabbagh, the agreement's terms include:

    • placing US forces in Iraq under the authority of the Iraqi government
    • US forces to leave the streets of Iraq's towns and villages by the middle of 2009
    • US forces to hand over their bases to Iraq during the course of 2009
    • US forces to lose the authority to raid Iraqi homes without an order from an Iraqi judge and permission of the government.


    In a statement, US National Security Council spokesman Gordon Johndroe said the US hoped for a successful vote in the Iraqi parliament:

    "We remain hopeful and confident we'll soon have an agreement that serves both the people of Iraq and the United States well and sends a signal to the region and the world that both our governments are committed to a stable, secure and democratic Iraq."

    The BBC's Andrew North, in Baghdad, says that a compromise was reached on the key issue of Iraqi jurisdiction over US troops and contractors in the country.

    In it, a joint committee will decide if Americans who commit crimes outside US bases should face Iraqi justice.

    While many Iraqi politicians publicly oppose the deal, our correspondent says, in private they support it.

    They believe it will give the government more power over US troops and will allow the Iraqi military more time to develop into an effective security force.

    The agreement is set to be submitted to Iraq's parliament later on Sunday, but it is not clear when the body will vote on it.

    It then needs to be ratified by Iraq's presidential council before Prime Minister Nouri Maliki can sign the deal with US President George W Bush.

    The BBC's Bob Trevelyan says that Mr Maliki has been trying to build support for the amended pact and the main Shia and Kurdish alliances in parliament have recently agreed to back it.

    He also appears to have persuaded the country's most senior Shia cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, not to oppose it publicly.

    The cleric is highly influential in Iraq's Shia community. Any public criticism of the pact by him would probably have stopped it winning parliamentary approval, our correspondent says.

    Iraqi officials say failure to pass the agreement would be highly damaging for Iraqi security.

    US officials have said it would mean suspending their operations in Iraq.

    Speaking before Sunday's meeting, Iraq's lead negotiator, Muwafaq al-Rubaie, said he believed the draft agreement was a "very good text" and he expected it to be approved by parliament as well.
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/7731971.stm

  15. #15
    Former Staff Senior Contributor Ironduke's Avatar
    Join Date
    02 Aug 03
    Location
    Arlington, Virginia
    Posts
    10,132
    Quote Originally Posted by gf0012-aust View Post
    the iraqi govt seems to have a view that will be challenging for Obama.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2...section=justin
    It appears he'll definitely be more constrained in dealing with issues in Iraq than Bush was, per the terms of this new agreement.

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Random Thoughts on the Mighty Hog - Part 2
    By Shipwreck in forum Military Aviation
    Replies: 168
    Last Post: 21 Nov 09,, 23:46
  2. Arab volunteers killed in Iraq: an Analysis
    By Shek in forum The Middle East and North Africa
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 24 Aug 05,, 12:29
  3. 25,000 civilians KilledIn Iraq
    By jimmy22 in forum The Middle East and North Africa
    Replies: 88
    Last Post: 13 Aug 05,, 16:41
  4. Quagmire or not?
    By Shek in forum The Middle East and North Africa
    Replies: 72
    Last Post: 04 Jul 05,, 17:18
  5. Why we are losing the war on terror
    By lulldapull in forum Operation Enduring Freedom and Af-Pak
    Replies: 114
    Last Post: 20 Nov 04,, 04:55

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •