• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Marines End Role In Iraq

cpwill

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
75,684
Reaction score
39,949
Location
USofA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I believe we have a poster here who argues that the Government of Iraq is, in fact, incapable of governing itself; that it depends upon US forces to back it up. when the fact that US forces are no longer needed to do so is pointed out, said poster refuses to acknowledge; claiming that the troops are still in the country, and therefore must be propping up the Iraqi state.

let us see what the poster says as American troops continue to leave Iraq.

The U.S. Marine Corps wrapped nearly seven years in Iraq on Saturday, handing over duties to the Army and signaling the beginning of an accelerated withdrawal of American troops as the U.S. turns its focus away from the waning Iraqi war to a growing one in Afghanistan.

...The Marines formally handed over control of Sunni-dominated Anbar, Iraq's largest province, to the Army during a ceremony at a base in Ramadi - where some of the fiercest fighting of the war took place.

If all goes as planned, the last remaining Marines will be followed out by tens of thousands of soldiers in the coming months. President Barack Obama has ordered all but 50,000 troops out of the country by Aug. 31, 2010, with most to depart after the March 7 parliamentary election.

The remaining troops will leave by the end of 2011 under a U.S.-Iraqi security pact.

...The province was once the heart of the deadly Sunni insurgency that erupted after the U.S.-led invasion in 2003. In the battles for control of the cities of Fallujah and Ramadi, the Marines saw some of the most brutal and deadliest fighting of the war.

...As many as 25,000 Marines were in Iraq at the peak, mostly in Anbar province. The few thousand who remain - except for U.S. Embassy guards and advisers in Baghdad - are expected to ship out in a matter of weeks.

The upcoming parliamentary election is also considered an important step toward speeding the U.S. troop pullout and seeking progress on stalled political initiatives. Among them: passing laws clarifying the rules for foreign oil investment and dividing the revenue among Iraq's main groups.

But plans to ban hundreds of candidates have raised deep concerns in Washington that the voting could widen rifts between the majority Shiites who gained power after Saddam's fall and Sunnis who are struggling to regain influence.

Biden, who arrived late Friday, had a full agenda of meetings with Iraqi leaders including Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who has strongly supported the blacklist and has resisted attempts at possible American mediation.

Some Sunni leaders have accused the Shiite-led government of using the ban as a political tool. But al-Maliki insists that Iraq must purge all ties to Saddam's Sunni-dominated regime. A vetting panel has put 512 names on the blacklist and more are expected.

Iraqi government spokesman, Ali al-Dabbagh, told The Associated Press that al-Maliki's meeting with Biden reinforced the stance that the election rules are "an Iraqi affair to be decided by the Iraqis themselves."

Al-Dabbagh said Biden was careful not to "give the wrong message that America wants to interfere in the Iraqi affairs."
 
I guess we'll have to wait and see how this affects the security situation, I'd love to see our troops come home or redeploy to Afghanistan and resolve this Iraq War, but not at the cost our of gains in the last few years. Hopefully this doesn't affect the situation negatively.
 
Hopefully this doesn't affect the situation negatively.

Yeah, I wouldn't be too quick to declare victory if it was me. Wait and see what happens in Iraq after all the US troops are gone. It could very easily spiral out of control again, depending on the situation.
 
Good. Can I have my money back now? :lol:
 
I believe we have a poster here who argues that the Government of Iraq is, in fact, incapable of governing itself; that it depends upon US forces to back it up. when the fact that US forces are no longer needed to do so is pointed out, said poster refuses to acknowledge; claiming that the troops are still in the country, and therefore must be propping up the Iraqi state.

let us see what the poster says as American troops continue to leave Iraq.

The U.S. Marine Corps wrapped nearly seven years in Iraq on Saturday, handing over duties to the Army and signaling the beginning of an accelerated withdrawal of American troops as the U.S. turns its focus away from the waning Iraqi war to a growing one in Afghanistan.

...The Marines formally handed over control of Sunni-dominated Anbar, Iraq's largest province, to the Army during a ceremony at a base in Ramadi - where some of the fiercest fighting of the war took place.

If all goes as planned, the last remaining Marines will be followed out by tens of thousands of soldiers in the coming months. President Barack Obama has ordered all but 50,000 troops out of the country by Aug. 31, 2010, with most to depart after the March 7 parliamentary election.

The remaining troops will leave by the end of 2011 under a U.S.-Iraqi security pact.

...The province was once the heart of the deadly Sunni insurgency that erupted after the U.S.-led invasion in 2003. In the battles for control of the cities of Fallujah and Ramadi, the Marines saw some of the most brutal and deadliest fighting of the war.

...As many as 25,000 Marines were in Iraq at the peak, mostly in Anbar province. The few thousand who remain - except for U.S. Embassy guards and advisers in Baghdad - are expected to ship out in a matter of weeks.

The upcoming parliamentary election is also considered an important step toward speeding the U.S. troop pullout and seeking progress on stalled political initiatives. Among them: passing laws clarifying the rules for foreign oil investment and dividing the revenue among Iraq's main groups.

But plans to ban hundreds of candidates have raised deep concerns in Washington that the voting could widen rifts between the majority Shiites who gained power after Saddam's fall and Sunnis who are struggling to regain influence.

Biden, who arrived late Friday, had a full agenda of meetings with Iraqi leaders including Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who has strongly supported the blacklist and has resisted attempts at possible American mediation.

Some Sunni leaders have accused the Shiite-led government of using the ban as a political tool. But al-Maliki insists that Iraq must purge all ties to Saddam's Sunni-dominated regime. A vetting panel has put 512 names on the blacklist and more are expected.

Iraqi government spokesman, Ali al-Dabbagh, told The Associated Press that al-Maliki's meeting with Biden reinforced the stance that the election rules are "an Iraqi affair to be decided by the Iraqis themselves."

Al-Dabbagh said Biden was careful not to "give the wrong message that America wants to interfere in the Iraqi affairs."



I think it is very crass to be flapping your MISSION ACCOMPLISHED banner in the wind while there are still troops being killed to prop-up the government there.

If you want to crow after the troops are safely home and our house of cards manages to stand against its people, fine. Until such time, all you can assert is that we have a successful occupation.
 
I believe we have a poster here who argues that the Government of Iraq is, in fact, incapable of governing itself; that it depends upon US forces to back it up. when the fact that US forces are no longer needed to do so is pointed out, said poster refuses to acknowledge; claiming that the troops are still in the country, and therefore must be propping up the Iraqi state.

let us see what the poster says as American troops continue to leave Iraq.

A bit premature, eh? As long as there are US troops in Iraq, your point is irrelevant. Come back after the last soldier leaves.
 
If you want to crow after the troops are safely home and our house of cards manages to stand against its people, fine. Until such time, all you can assert is that we have a successful occupation.

The "troops" aren't going safely home. The Marines, after dealing with the mess of Iraq, are being re-focused to deal with the mess in Afghanistan.

And whether or not Iraq succeeds of fails will be entirely up to Muslims...not us. Our mission was to provide opportunity. Considering the international travel of Muslims into Iraq to slaughter rival tribesman, if they fail it speaks on the failure of the entire region....not just Iraq. This is probably the Arabs last real chance to correct their region's failing path. Iraq will prove once and for is they are capable of creating a rule of law, democracy instead of theocracy and dictatorship. The last real chance they had was in Lebanon following the Second World War.
 
Our mission was to provide opportunity.

I'm sure the Muslims appreciate the hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians we killed. Who wouldn't?

They showed their gratitude on 9/11, and as soon as our occupation of Iraq ends, they will show their appreciation to the new regime there we are currently propping up.
 
I'm sure the Muslims appreciate the hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians we killed. Who wouldn't?

Take it up with Rumsfeld. I don't care what they appreciate. We ended our mission of containment. We did what they should have done for themselves. They took advantage of the absence of their dictator to slaughter each other. What they do with the opportunity they have hence forward is their business. They have to live there. We'll kill our enemies regardless.

By the way...you keep ignoring this....where's that great Iraqi civil war you were parading around some time back? Spare us your powers of analysis.

They showed their gratitude on 9/11, and as soon as our occupation of Iraq ends, they will show their appreciation to the new regime there we are currently propping up.

Not our problem. But since 9/11 they have seen ours. I'd say "they" have and will continue to get the worst of it.
 
We did what they should have done for themselves.

Speculation until our occupation forces are withdrawn that are currently propping up the new regime.
We'll kill our enemies regardless.

Even ones that are of no threat. Impressive!

By the way...you keep ignoring this....where's that great Iraqi civil war you were parading around some time back?

I have never asserted that our occupation and our bribes with taxpayer money were not successful in beating back the local resistance to our invasion.

Our occupation was very successful!

I'd say "they" have and will continue to get the worst of it.

I completely agree with you that "they will continue to get the worst of it," as they have for decades!
 
Speculation until our occupation forces are withdrawn that are currently propping up the new regime.



Speculation? did you not understand what I wrote? They were responsible for themselves, which means that Saddam Hussein was their problem to deal with. It should not have been ours. As for "prop"....

This is there mission. We were always going to leave despite the pundit morons who were declaring us as infinite occupiers for all time.

Even ones that are of no threat. Impressive!

Such is warfare. Welcome to life.

I have never asserted that our occupation and our bribes with taxpayer money were not successful in beating back the local resistance to our invasion.

Our occupation was very successful!

Oh on the contrary. I had discussion with you about the "Civil War" back and then and you were quite confident that the ignorant journalists were wise beyond their years. Well...where's this civil war? You simply donpt rate to come along after the fact and change your tune to hide the egg on your face.


I completely agree with you that "they will continue to get the worst of it," as they have for decades!

Culture is fate. If they weren't such failures they wouldn't have outsiders feeling like they have to protect themselves and doing what they should be doing for themselves.
 
Last edited:
Speculation? did you not understand what I wrote? They were responsible for themselves, which means that Saddam Hussein was their problem to deal with. It should not have been ours. As for "prop"....

Yes, you have made your opinion very clear, but you cannot back it up until all the US troops are withdrawn that are currently propping up the new regime there we helped install.


Oh on the contrary. I had discussion with you about the "Civil War" back and then and you were quite confident that the ignorant journalists were wise beyond their years. Well...where's this civil war?

The overwhelming force of our occupation and bribes with taxpayer money has quelled it, for now.

It remains to be seen what will happen when all of our troops are gone.

Culture is fate. If they weren't such failures they wouldn't have outsiders feeling like they have to protect themselves and doing what they should be doing for themselves.

Again, I have no clue to what you are trying to say there. Please clarify if you expect a response.
 
Yes, you have made your opinion very clear, but you cannot back it up until all the US troops are withdrawn that are currently propping up the new regime there we helped install.

Back what up? Whether or not they succeed will be entirely up to them. What am I supposed to not be able to back up?

U.S. troops have little to do with propping up anything right now. The vast majority of all security is maintained by Iraqi troops and the forward bases where Marines used to be, have contained Iraqi troops for some time. But if they fail to preserve their government after we have all left, then they have to live with that.....not us. Our thorn is gone and we have been hanging around to at least give them an opportunity. Whether or not they ceaze it is not our affair.




Again, I have no clue to what you are trying to say there. Please clarify if you expect a response.

What aren't you getting? If you do not understand the history if this region or the tribal identities then what can I tell you that will not be confusing?

Saddam Hussein was their leader. They were given enough opportunities to rise up and deal with thier own thorn. He attacked two neighboring nations and as late as 2002 he flew military jets over Jordanian and Saudi skies. Yet, none of them did a thing to ensure their own safety and stability of oil production except rely on outsiders to take all blame. In the mean time we were still shoving our values in the corner to maintain the UN's lack of morality. Bin Laden didn't care about the "starving children of Iraq" as much as he cared about the Sunni children of Iraq and the excuse. After Hussein was toppled, Iraq was flooded with international Muslims from througout the region and they targetted Shia and Americans. Al-Zarqawi even used the opportunity to launch a terrorist attack in Jordan to kill even more Muslims.

But these are the types who are merely defending their nations...right?
 
Last edited:
Whether or not they succeed will be entirely up to them.

Exactly what I said, the Iraqi people will determine the legitimacy of the new regime after our troops are no longer there to prop it up.

U.S. troops have little to do with propping up anything right now.

We won't know that until they are no longer there.
 
We won't know that until they are no longer there.

No..."we" know because "we" are intimately involved. The gradual retrograde of troops from the security roll has been happening since 2008. The first real test was the removal of Marines from the forward violent bases. Obama inherited a Bush/Lake/Nasr plan and so far the Iraqi security forces have proven to be able to handle their own. "We" un-officially call it the "anti-Vietnam" plan.

But, as you have stated, the last real test is after "we" are completely gone from the Iraqi landscape. But there is a process and your pissing on every step does what for you? "We" are expecting a back lash of violence at first (which you haven't seen yet). But after this wave, "we" are expecting forward progressive movement. However, beware the media which will encourage you and others to keep unrinating. Get used to it now, because the rest of the Middle East is going to go through this over the next half century.

"We" are out of time. The American government already waited too long to start this mission. Without this forced path change now, tomorrow's Muslim nuclear weapons will dictate the path.
 
Last edited:
By the way...you keep ignoring this....where's that great Iraqi civil war you were parading around some time back? Spare us your powers of analysis.
.

Be patient. Iraq will have a major civil war in the next ten years.
 
Be patient. Iraq will have a major civil war in the next ten years.

It's a possibility. It always was. And this is what aggravates the hell out of me. People gamble their hopes and dreams on politician speeches and ignorant post hindsight on terrorists justifications. Do your own damn analysis for a change and base it on the reality of the situation, which is always far beyond what a dumb politician or journalists will offer you. Practical outcomes and processes have never been a part of the media analysis. Vermont in the Middle East was never a possibility. The military knew it. Why did the public have such a hard time?

This is there problem and it is inevitable that these tribes figure out what it means to be a part of the modern world. However, if the wrong side begins to win, we will alter the outcome because nuclear weapons is the future of this region. People pretend to give a **** about Muslims in the Middle East and assume to know more than their government (which has far more tools at their disposal to understand the situtation than they) as a means to blast their American government, but have no sense about what this current phase of effort even means. Pakistan and India already has nukes. By all means, let's wait until the tribally oppressive nations of Saudi Arabia, Syria, Saddam's Iraq, and Iran have nukes to play with. The world's economy and safety will be well in good hands as they beg America to wave a magic wand.
 
Last edited:
Be patient. Iraq will have a major civil war in the next ten years.

We had our own, and came out better for it in the end.

Sometimes, violence is necessary.
 
We had our own, and came out better for it in the end.

Sometimes, violence is necessary.

Only if the good team wins. In Iraq I am not sure there is a good team.
The new regime is just as corrupt as the old one.
 
We had our own, and came out better for it in the end.

Sometimes, violence is necessary.

Well said. Civil Wars, with a common positive goal, happens. Even the French Revolution, which was the source of great violence, is celebrated as a positively globally impacting occurrence.

We see the internal warlike violence of white Europeans and Americans as positive in the grand sceme of things. The American Civil War, World Wars, Cold Wars....all for the sake of mankind. How concieted and arrogant. We shove the internal struggles of "lesser" folk as being insignificant and shameful. Perhaps disguised racism fits this as a more appropriate definition than any other thing.
 
Only if the good team wins. In Iraq I am not sure there is a good team.
The new regime is just as corrupt as the old one.

Why don't you actually talk about this so I can tear it apart?

You have abslolutely no base for this statement at all. The last regime slaughtered the Shia and Kurds. It oppressed the Sunni. It attacked two neighboring countries (Iran and Kuwait). It flew military jets over Jordanian and Saudi air space as late as 2002. This makes a total of 4 neighboring sovereignties in the oil heartland the last regime disrespected. [Come to think about it, wouldn't it have been in our easier interests to simply kiss him and applaud him as our dictator as he supplied us with the entire region's oil reserves instead of taking the hard route and being criticized for our every step to bring democracy?] Anyway...how is the new "regime" as corrupt as the last? Do you actually have a discussion piece or just full of **** and political venom?
 
Last edited:
Only if the good team wins. In Iraq I am not sure there is a good team.
The new regime is just as corrupt as the old one.

That is why we would support and give aid to the ones we felt better embraced to goals of democracy in the ME. I agree that if we left a civil war unchecked, it could go badly and a coup for power could leave the Iraqis with a worse dictator than Saddam. But its not in our interests, or the interests of the Iraqi people to live that life again. So we influence and support the better of whatever happens.
 
This is there mission. We were always going to leave despite the pundit morons who were declaring us as infinite occupiers for all time.

That remains to be seen ..we're still there.
 
That remains to be seen ..we're still there.

Well, it always "remains to be seen," but sooner or later pissing on the process has to stop. And usually without a "I was wrong." The public sways and dances with the media.

There is a process. This has been a gradual retrograde since 2008. Marines have shifted to focus on Afghanistan finally, because Iraqi forces have been standing up little by little. This was always the process. And in the end, Iraqis will be handling their own internal struggles just fine. The American public's role will be to declare "failure" and "devistation" after every sinigle media reported IED blast that goes off, thereby ignoring the process still.
 
Last edited:
Well, it always "remains to be seen," but sooner or later pissing on the process has to stop. And usually without a "I was wrong." The public sways and dances with the media.

I'll believe it when the last soldier leaves the country; not until then.

Remember, it doesn't take much to stop withdrawing at some point. Then we become an occupation force.
 
Back
Top Bottom