Would imediate withdrawal from iraq result in a third world war?

[Red_Dave]

One thing those who advocate an imediate withdrawel from iraq [as i used to] should bear in mind is that the coalition forces are the only thing starting between a full scale civil war and the relatively sectarian conflict we are seeing today.

Where a civil war to occur we know Iran would get involved because it already has links with shia militia. The saudi government has already declared its intention to protect sunni civillians and this would draw the two countrys into conflict with each other.

If such a conflict where to occur it would be likely that the U.S and Brittian would get involved due to there intrests in the region [arms, oil e.t.c] and there alliance with saudi arabia. It would be likely that Syria would get involved due to its promise to protect Iran. The result would be a conflict between two coalitions of nations as in WW1 and WW2.

If this where to happen there would be far reaching concequences such as an increase in terroism in Europe and the U.S, and a economic chaos due to problems in oil supply. This would inevitably heighten ethnic tensions.

Naturally im not saying this is all going to happen but theres a significant risk that it will. If this risk exists could it not be accuratly said that the ocupation is a neccesairy evil?

 

[WI Crippler]

Re: Would imediate withdrawel from iraq result in a third world war?

One thing those who advocate an imediate withdrawel from iraq [as i used to] should bear in mind is that the coalition forces are the only thing starting between a full scale civil war and the relatively sectarian conflict we are seeing today.

Where a civil war to occur we know Iran would get involved because it already has links with shia militia. The saudi government has already declared its intention to protect sunni civillians and this would draw the two countrys into conflict with each other.

If such a conflict where to occur it would be likely that the U.S and Brittian would get involved due to there intrests in the region [arms, oil e.t.c] and there alliance with saudi arabia. It would be likely that Syria would get involved due to its promise to protect Iran. The result would be a conflict between two coalitions of nations as in WW1 and WW2.

If this where to happen there would be far reaching concequences such as an increase in terroism in Europe and the U.S, and a economic chaos due to problems in oil supply. This would inevitably heighten ethnic tensions.

Naturally im not saying this is all going to happen but theres a significant risk that it will. If this risk exists could it not be accuratly said that the ocupation is a neccesairy evil?

Well I don't see preventing a 3rd WW as a necessary evil, but due to our invasion of Iraq, it has become our responsibility to keep it from getting worse. What we are trying to acheive in Iraq is TRUE stability, not just stability for our own interests. if we wanted stability for our own interests, we could have made friends with Saddam, just like we did prior to the first gulf war.

The scary part about a 3rd WW taking place in that region, is that we don't know who is going to support whom. Obviously the US is probably not going to help Iran beat Saudia Arabia, or support any attacks in the region against Israel, but what about all the other players?? France, Germany, Russia, China, India, Pakistan etc... Its too cloudy to see how those nations would react to a disaster after a troop withdrawal.

 

[mikhail]

Re: Would imediate withdrawel from iraq result in a third world war?

the problem is with the assumption we can stop the civil war it seems like you advocating war no matter how long.

 

[Iriemon]

Re: Would imediate withdrawel from iraq result in a third world war?

Interesting to speculate about. But I don't think it would be likely that civil war in Iraq would lead to a world war. The outside states are not that invested in it. It is not in the interest of Muslems on either side to start a inter-Islamic war over Iraq. Is it likely that Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia would send troops into Iraq? Is Iran for that matter? While I agree Iran wants to extend its hemegony, replacing American troops with its soldiers in Iraq would be a pretty foolish move. I would doubt the would expect that Iranian soldiers would be able to do any better job that US soliders and controlling the country, it would risk bringing other Muslim nations into a broader conflict as well as retribution for powers like the US. It would not be very popular with its people, who have enough problems as it is.

Even if there was a inter-Islamic war, it seems unlikely (and would sure be foolish, IMO) for the US to takes sides and get involved in it directly. Even if Iran were able to maintain some presence in Iran, it doesn't have the capacity to do anything against other ME nations such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia, the latter particularly having relatively strong firepower. I doubt the EU, Russia or China would care to intervene directly in such an event, except in a peacekeeping role, perhaps. And in any case it is unlikely they'd take a military position on the opposite side of the US.

The world wars were so encompassing because you had clearly defined alliances with roughly equivalent power. You don't have that situation in Iraq or the ME.

Much more likely is that there will be a low scale struggle in Iraq until the sides get tired of fighting and compromise, split apart, or a victor emerges. Not that makes the situation any better than it was in Mar 03 -- and probably worse from the US perspective.

 

[Iriemon]

Re: Would imediate withdrawel from iraq result in a third world war?

Well I don't see preventing a 3rd WW as a necessary evil, but due to our invasion of Iraq, it has become our responsibility to keep it from getting worse. What we are trying to acheive in Iraq is TRUE stability, not just stability for our own interests. if we wanted stability for our own interests, we could have made friends with Saddam, just like we did prior to the first gulf war.

The scary part about a 3rd WW taking place in that region, is that we don't know who is going to support whom. Obviously the US is probably not going to help Iran beat Saudia Arabia, or support any attacks in the region against Israel, but what about all the other players?? France, Germany, Russia, China, India, Pakistan etc... Its too cloudy to see how those nations would react to a disaster after a troop withdrawal.

What is our responsibility if it is our very presence there making it worse?

 

[Billo_Really]

Re: Would imediate withdrawel from iraq result in a third world war?

The "thread question" has got it backwards.

The longer we stay, the closer we get to armageddon.

 

[WI Crippler]

Re: Would imediate withdrawel from iraq result in a third world war?

What is our responsibility if it is our very presence there making it worse?

Do you believe it is worse with our presence, or do you believe it would be worse without our presence?? Thats what you have to ask yourself.

This is my opinion. Since the invasion of Iraq was the US leading the charge, it is our responsibility to the Iraqi people to leave the place in better hands than we found it. After all toppling Saddam and the Baathist regime was our goal. We accomplished that in a mere 3 weeks. Should we have just left after then?? Would the situation have worked itself out had we toppled Saddam, and their military and economy, and just left?? I don't believe it would have, and you would see death tolls in Baghdad much higher than they are now. Or it would be stabilised under a regime far worse than Saddams.

The only thing we wouldn't have to see is the death toll count for coalition forces scrolling across the bottom of the screen daily.

Thats just my opinion though.

 

[Tashah]

Re: Would imediate withdrawel from iraq result in a third world war?

What is our responsibility if it is our very presence there making it worse?

As an occupying military power, the lawful responsibilities of the United States are codified in the Geneva Conventions and Protocols

 

[Iriemon]

Re: Would imediate withdrawel from iraq result in a third world war?

Do you believe it is worse with our presence, or do you believe it would be worse without our presence?? Thats what you have to ask yourself.

This is my opinion. Since the invasion of Iraq was the US leading the charge, it is our responsibility to the Iraqi people to leave the place in better hands than we found it. After all toppling Saddam and the Baathist regime was our goal. We accomplished that in a mere 3 weeks. Should we have just left after then?? Would the situation have worked itself out had we toppled Saddam, and their military and economy, and just left?? I don't believe it would have, and you would see death tolls in Baghdad much higher than they are now. Or it would be stabilised under a regime far worse than Saddams.

The only thing we wouldn't have to see is the death toll count for coalition forces scrolling across the bottom of the screen daily.

Thats just my opinion though.

IMO, our continued presence in Iraq is making things worse. The fact that the great satan infidel is unjustifiably occupying their holy lands adds fuel to the fire. There may be an escalation of violence when we leave, but in the long run our continued presence is making it worse.

 

[Billo_Really]

Re: Would imediate withdrawel from iraq result in a third world war?

Originally posted by Tashah:
As an occupying military power, the lawful responsibilities of the United States are codified in the Geneva Conventions and Protocols

We've already broken those.

 

[Obama08]

Re: Would imediate withdrawel from iraq result in a third world war?

If we were to stop being dependent on foreign energy, than we wouldn't have to worry about it. We would just let them duke it out...But as long as we have greedy conservatives running this capitalist **** hole I cannot see the US getting off of oil imports.

 

[VTA]

Re: Would imediate withdrawel from iraq result in a third world war?

If we were to stop being dependent on foreign energy, than we wouldn't have to worry about it. We would just let them duke it out...But as long as we have greedy conservatives running this capitalist **** hole I cannot see the US getting off of oil imports.

Spoken from the comforts of your own capitalist supplied shithole, complete with luxuries directly attributed to 'foreign energy'.

Nice. Let us know when you're about to dump your computer, your clothes, your cell phone, your television, and basically everything else you own to really start making a difference.

 

[Obama08]

Re: Would imediate withdrawel from iraq result in a third world war?

Spoken from the comforts of your own capitalist supplied shithole, complete with luxuries directly attributed to 'foreign energy'.

Ehh sort of....but theres no excuse that we can't get off their energy over time.

Nice. Let us know when you're about to dump your computer, your clothes, your cell phone, your television, and basically everything else you own to really start making a difference.

Well theres quite a few...actually millions of people who do not have any of those things directly because of our capatilist society.

 

[Just Me 2]

Re: Would imediate withdrawel from iraq result in a third world war?

We created the mess and we need to fix it. I don't believe it is worse with us there, I don't think it will lead to WWIII if we leave but I do think it will be a long time before we can leave and feel secure that it will not sink into a terrorist sh!thole.

 

[Billo_Really]

Re: Would imediate withdrawel from iraq result in a third world war?

Originally posted by Just Me 2
We created the mess and we need to fix it. I don't believe it is worse with us there, I don't think it will lead to WWIII if we leave but I do think it will be a long time before we can leave and feel secure that it will not sink into a terrorist sh!thole.

That's like saying to a girl that just got pregnant after she was raped, "Well, now that your pregnant, you going to have to marry the rapist or the kid will grow up with a single mom."

Al qaeda's afraid they will get booted out of the country once the US leaves. Because there will be no reason for them to be there. And another thing, most of the sectarian violence is coming from the Shiite government the US supports!

 

[Just Me 2]

Re: Would imediate withdrawel from iraq result in a third world war?

That's like saying to a girl that just got pregnant after she was raped, "Well, now that your pregnant, you going to have to marry the rapist or the kid will grow up with a single mom."

Al qaeda's afraid they will get booted out of the country once the US leaves. Because there will be no reason for them to be there. And another thing, most of the sectarian violence is coming from the Shiite government the US supports!

You really believe the terrorists are there killing Iraqis because we are there?

 

[Billo_Really]

Re: Would imediate withdrawel from iraq result in a third world war?

Originally posted by Just Me 2
You really believe the terrorists are there killing Iraqis because we are there?

I believe the problem is much more complex than that. That there is not just one problem you can put your finger on and say, "Yeah, that's the problem." A lot has to do with their tribal history, a lot has to do with us opening a can of worms by invading, as well as a lot of things we don't even know about. I don't really care about Iraq. I just want us out of that equation of violence. I just want the world to stop hating us. Because if it keeps going on like this, we will have more enemies to be worried about. Enemies we do not want to fight.

 

[Just Me 2]

Re: Would imediate withdrawel from iraq result in a third world war?

I believe the problem is much more complex than that. That there is not just one problem you can put your finger on and say, "Yeah, that's the problem." A lot has to do with their tribal history, a lot has to do with us opening a can of worms by invading, as well as a lot of things we don't even know about. I don't really care about Iraq. I just want us out of that equation of violence. I just want the world to stop hating us. Because if it keeps going on like this, we will have more enemies to be worried about. Enemies we do not want to fight.

I agree with all that you said. Shocked?!? I do really I am very torn about what the right plan is. I wanted us out yesterday but I think if we leave without getting some sorta stable government in place we will have bigger problems (if that's possible) then we have now.

 

[Billo_Really]

Re: Would imediate withdrawel from iraq result in a third world war?

Originally posted by Just Me 2
I agree with all that you said. Shocked?!? I do really I am very torn about what the right plan is. I wanted us out yesterday but I think if we leave without getting some sorta stable government in place we will have bigger problems (if that's possible) then we have now.

I don't really have an answer. I wouldn't want to be the President.

 

[Just Me 2]

Re: Would imediate withdrawel from iraq result in a third world war?

I don't really have an answer. I wouldn't want to be the President.

You couldn't pay me enough to take that job.

 

[Billo_Really]

Re: Would imediate withdrawel from iraq result in a third world war?

Originally posted by galenrox:
You don't have any evidence that we have any sort of option of avoidence. Now certainly, there are certain forces we are facing who couldn't give half a **** about the US if the US weren't right in their faces all of the time, but obviously these forces do not comprise ALL of the forces, we know al Qaeda has a significant presence fighting us in Iraq, as are the Iranians, and considering that Iran has frequently threatened us, and just so happens to be developing nuclear capabilities, and al Qaeda has already struck us, please, explain to me how we have an option of not fighting them!

It'd all be very nice if we could just leave Iraq and everyone would just hold hands and sing "Kum Bay Yah", but unfortunately this conflict is taking place in a strange little place called THE REAL WORLD, and in the real world al Qaeda has no interest in stopping the fight with us, and Iran is developing nuclear power, and refusing the removal of nuclear waste that can be developed into weapons grade, in defiance of just about everyone of significance, and if we leave Iraq, there will be a civil war in an OVERWHELMINGLY Shia nation which shares a massive border with Iran, which a reasonable person would see as an indication that Iran would gain power (as they already have a lot of support from the Shia, and they're an established power dealing with supporters who would be in the middle of an absolute power vaccum), as would al Qaeda, who have the ability to provide security for those who would otherwise have none (and if that's not a way to build loyalty, I don't know what is).

You're right, **** in Iraq is very complex, and as a product of which, simple answers will not suffice. This is no longer a war unto itself, it was when we first went in, but it is clearly no longer one, we are now fighting multiple enemies who are only connected in that they have forces in Iraq, and they represent the radical Islamist threat. It's no longer the Iraq war, it's the war on terror, and as a product of which, avoidance is not an option.

Of coarse there is an option. If we leave the country, they can't shoot at us. And when we leave the country, there will be no reason for the insurgency to continue. We have de-stabilized the entire planet with this bullshit war. A half a million people could be dead because of faulty intelligence and oil greed. With a little American arrogance on the side.

The REAL WORLD is this war was wrong from the beginning. And every mother-f.u.c.k.e.r that supported this war should be charged with Crimes Against Humanity!

This WOT is total, 100% bullshit! There is no tangible enemy and no way to predict and ending. So we have a perpetual state of war with the President claiming the powers of a monarchy. You don't preserve freedom and liberty by supressing freedom and liberty.

Think about that...

 

[Bergslagstroll]

Re: Would imediate withdrawel from iraq result in a third world war?

Well the big problem is that USA goverment say that american troops has to stay in Iraq for stability at the same time they don't seem to have a workable plan for creating stability.

 

[Morrow]

Re: Would imediate withdrawel from iraq result in a third world war?

i'm all for withdrawl, but I think using a condom in the first place would have been a better idea.

 

[VTA]

Re: Would imediate withdrawel from iraq result in a third world war?

Of coarse there is an option. If we leave the country, they can't shoot at us. And when we leave the country, there will be no reason for the insurgency to continue. We have de-stabilized the entire planet with this bullshit war. A half a million people could be dead because of faulty intelligence and oil greed. With a little American arrogance on the side.

The REAL WORLD is this war was wrong from the beginning. And every mother-f.u.c.k.e.r that supported this war should be charged with Crimes Against Humanity!

This WOT is total, 100% bullshit! There is no tangible enemy and no way to predict and ending. So we have a perpetual state of war with the President claiming the powers of a monarchy. You don't preserve freedom and liberty by supressing freedom and liberty.

Think about that...

I can see HBCA has been blessedly untouched by the acts of war that have occured, giving the illusion that there really is no tangible enemy. Unfortunately, for those who have been affected by the acts of a very real and tangible enemy cannot wallow in such a state euphorical denial; such a state doesn't exist.

They've lost loved one's, in the commision of a days work (WTC I and II, Embassy bombings, etc), or what was supposed to be a vacation. They've watched the civilians of the country they love be targeted with misplaced aggression and such, yet in HBCA there remains a population unscathed. Outstanding. If you were a religious man, this where I'd suggest you give thanks to the high and mighty...

I can only guess what stands for stability in HBCA is watching American Idol unencumbered by the thought that you'll have to hear about a war that's raging on the 11:00 news later on, yet never have to lift a finger to influence?

Stability must mean pretending people aren't dying, (just as long as they're soley American's and civilians that are doing the not-dying) at the hands of savages brought up on an ideology that obedience is only wrought by the sword (Thanks Khomeini!).

Shhhh.... Let's remain quiet and snore in our tranquil, anaesthetic slumber of luxury, only to be aroused to grouse at what, that which follows for popular opinion says, we must grouse at. We can ignore history and factual events. We can deny plausibility and material actions, for as long as we've not had a tactlile relationship with them, they simply cannot exist.

 

[Red_Dave]

Re: Would imediate withdrawel from iraq result in a third world war?

The "thread question" has got it backwards.

The longer we stay, the closer we get to armageddon.

How so? Surely Sunni and Shia can kill each other more effectively if we are not there to stop them?