Iraq--Send More Troops??

Sending More Troops to Iraq Would be Mistake

If you agree with this letter, send one to your local paper and to your congressman and senator.:

Editor

Detroit Free Press

Sending more troops to Iraq is unlikely to be successful because our experience during the past three years has demonstrated the inability of conventional military forces to deal with the Iraq insurgency. Conventional forces can't hit insurgents who remain invisible through the cooperation, willing or intimidated, of the local population.

Moreover, however much training we provide, the Iraqi army is also unlikely to stop the insurgency because is is infiltrated by insurgents and sympathizers of the insurgents. Worse, many of the Shiites in the Iraq army and police are under the effective control of one or another of the militant groups.

Therefore, it would be a mistake for the United States to send more troops on a mission that experience tells us has little or no chance of success.

Ralph Deeds

Birmingham, Michigan

More by this Author


19 comments

livingtwist profile image

livingtwist 9 years ago from Sulphur

You may very wel be right. One thing is for sure it will be more fighting either way at least in the near future. If and only if the Iraq government and people decide to make it work is it possible. Past track record doesn't look like they are headed this way. For our part we must respect their lead and get our own house in order. All the talk in Congress and the media is not helping anyone.


jimmythejock profile image

jimmythejock 9 years ago from Scotland

even if it was published world wide would bush listen? probably not.....jimmy


rockinjoe profile image

rockinjoe 9 years ago from Standing right behind you!

Ralph, what would be your solution? (Or did I miss that in another Hub?)


Ralph Deeds profile image

Ralph Deeds 9 years ago Author

I don't think there is a good solution. We are looking into a black bottomless abyss in the Middle East. The least worst solution, in my opinion, would be to tell the Iraqis that we are sending no more troops to their country and we are going to begin to withdraw our troops gradually over a one or two-year period starting immediately. Further we intend to have no permanent military bases in Iraq and we have no designs on their oil other than that production be restored and sold on the world market. They are welcome to invite foreign oil companies to bid on their oil exploration and production or to do it themselves with an Iraqi national company. The Shiites and Sunnis and Kurds will have to make peace among themselves. And as the bipartisan Iraq Commission recommended, we should make a serious diplomatic effort to involve other countries in the Middle East in stabilizing Iraq. Finally, we should make a strong diplomatic effort to advance the peace process between Israel and Palestine. This would require ending our tilt toward Israel and adopting a more neutral posture as recommended by Jimmy Carter and many others.


dj 9 years ago

we


dj 9 years ago

are the top dogs. what are we going to be considered if we can't stop Iraq. Think of the big counties.


SJK VDO 8 years ago

After 5+ years of this abomination in Iraq, it should be clear too all Americans that the Iraqis are not interested in the BUSHwhackers insane idea of a democracy in Iraq. It will NEVER work. They don't understand what Democracy is. The only proven stablity in Iraq was when it's late dictator ruled with a millitant army which should have given every nation on earth a clue into the Iraqi situation.

More troups; more failure. I agree there are too many sympathizers in Iraq that support the terrorists and the insurgents. Remember people their fighting for OIL too! The only real solution in the Middle East is for every country to get off of OIL = Offensive Idiotic Leadership. America is spending over 1 billion dollars a day for foreign OIL. If you could get a billion dollars a day, wouldn't you be fighting for OIL?

Please vist my other Hubs for for info on Iraq:

Search for: Iraq Mission and Pres. Bush


Ralph Deeds profile image

Ralph Deeds 8 years ago Author

I'm with you!


blangrehr profile image

blangrehr 8 years ago from Spartanburg SC

I guess you missed this one didn't Mr. Deeds? Wait, I know you and Obama still refuse to admit the surge has worked great and we are on the cusp of victory.

I know how bad you guys wished for defeat. Well cheer up, Mr. Obama will most likely be the next President, I'm sure you guys will have another chance to lose a war...good luck.


Ralph Deeds profile image

Ralph Deeds 8 years ago Author

No, I don't think I missed this one. It's true that casualties have decreased in recent months, in part due to the "surge." However, there will be no "victory" in Iraq and no happy ending for the U.S. nor for the Iraqi women who can no longer work outside the home or even be seen on the street without a burkha, nor for the Christians who have been driven out of the country and certainly not for the estimated 100,000 dead Iraqi citizens. We have made a mess of the country and spent a $trillion of the American taxpayers' money, not to mention 3,300 lives and God knows how many American soldiers maimed for life. And for what? What have we accomplished? Creating a magnet and training ground for terrorists from all over the Middle East certainly hasn't improved our U.S. security. Neither has alienating a majority of the nations of the world.

Mr. Blangrehr, I wish you would learn to argue with facts rather than invective. I don't know a single person who wished for defeat in Iraq, and I resent your accusation. Resorting to name calling only shows your lack of knowledge of the facts.


blangrehr profile image

blangrehr 8 years ago from Spartanburg SC

Name calling? is Mr. Deeds a bad name to call you? If so I apologize: the fact you are just one of many on the radical left to verbally degrade and demonize our men and women in the service. Shall I go back and cut and paste quotes from Dirben and Kerry and and Reid; or Mertha. No you're right the left never dreamed and promised defeat, my ignorance is showing, while your hate sparkles.

It is true, it takes a very big person to admit when they were wrong, didn't Mr. Obama just admit that the surge worked beyond anybodies wildest dreams.

But, we all know that he never gets it right...have a good election Mr. Deeds


Misha profile image

Misha 8 years ago from DC Area

I don't see anything of the kind in this hub blangrehr. And I don't think it's a good idea to blame all that any left-oriented person ever said about the war on Ralph...


blangrehr profile image

blangrehr 8 years ago from Spartanburg SC

Misha, I really wasn’t blaming Mr. Deeds for anything, he wrote a letter to his local newspaper calling for the surge not to happen because it wouldn’t work. Obviously the surge has worked, even the Messiah has admitted (finally) to as much. I simply pointed out to Mr. Deeds that he was wrong, on this particular issue. I did not call him any names period, he responded that nobody had ever wanted defeat which is again just plain wrong. I’ll be happy to post numerous comments from Obama to Pelosi calling our brave soldiers, murders, terrorist and claiming publically that Iraq was lost, finished and unwinnable.

They were wrong and in my humble opinion traitors to their oaths of office and to this country. But, I did not call Mr. Deeds names, nor blame him for anything.


Misha profile image

Misha 8 years ago from DC Area

The war is not over yet. We'll talk when it's over, if we are still alive then :)

And I was not talking about name calling - re-read my post. :)



JoeDoe 8 years ago from Right next door

Ralph,

Good observation but I have to disagree with you a bit. Unfortunately we created the mess that is Iraq and if we choose to withdraw now, we will pay for it later. The insurgents want us out because their religion tells them to fight any non muslim that has entered their country. The good thing is that the insurgents are far fewer than the normal thinking moderate folks in Iraq. The bad news is that the moderate folks don't stand a chance when these whacko religious morons are trying to kill them or persuade them.

If we pull out Iraq will not stand on its own... it will crumble. Unfortunately we elected a whacko named George Bush who knew nothing about the balance of power in the middle east and who has created a mess that may take decades to sort out.


Ralph Deeds profile image

Ralph Deeds 8 years ago Author

Well, there's truth in what you say about withdrawing now and paying later. However, we may pay later even if we withdraw now. I find it hard to see a happy ending for us or Iraq in the future. I think a more likely scenario is that the Shiite religious majority will take over and run roughshod over everybody else--Sunnis, Christians, women and eventually the Kurds. Since Iran is ruled by Shiite fanatics Iraq is likely to come under the influence of Iran if not a satellite of Iran. And I wonder how much time and money and lives will be spent reaching the kind of solution you envision and whether it would be worth the effort. I wish I could believe that a satisfactory ending is in the cards. Finally, I don't think we should suddenly "withdraw now." I think we should announce and adhere to an orderly and gradual withdrawal schedule. Then the Iraqis might just get their act together.

 Moreover, I wonder whether "success" is in the cards in Afghanistan. Several countries--Great Britain and Russia have tried unsuccessfully to dominate that country. I doubt that we will be any more successful and what the cost will be of trying. I guess that makes me a "surrender monkey." I worry even more about Bush-Cheney giving Israel a green light to bomb Iran before they leave office. They may well be developing a nuclear capability, but they don't have it yet and there is still time for diplomacy and sanctions and perhaps bribery (aid to their ailing economy) to work. There is no imminent threat to Israel, let alone the U.S. Moreover, I have difficulty understanding why its okay for Israel to have nuclear weapons but not Iran or anyone else. Real politik I guess. Neither of them should have them and we should be doing more on reducing our nukes and stopping leaks of fissionable materials from former USSR regions.

In the 20th century we have repeatedly used the military to deal with problems or alleged problems which could better have been dealt with by non-military methods. Both Democrats and Republicans in the White House have lied to the American public about the necessity or justification for war or escalation--e.g. Johnson's lies about the Gulf of Tonkin, Reagan's intervention in Central America, Bush's lies about WMD in Iraq. The New York Times and the Washington Post, the TV networks and most of the mainstream media have been complicit in helping disseminate the lies, time after time. [See Norman Solomon's "War Made Easy." http://hubpages.com/politics/War-Made-Easy-narrate...


JoeDoe 8 years ago from Right next door

Ralph,

I really wish that more people were as insightful as yourself! I know too many people who do not understand the complexity of the whole situation. A lot of people still seem to think that the world fears us and we can just go over and bomb whomever we like if they don't agree. Unfortunately this is what GW did with Iraq and now we are going to be cleaning up the mess for years... at the expense of our own economy!

As for Iran... frankly they are no less dangerous than Pakistan which also has nukes. Its funny how we ignored the fact that Musharraf was the DICTATOR of a muslim country that was a known sponsor of terrorism! The Iranian people are actually the least hardcore of the muslim countries (though their government leaders still play the religious card), so there was a chance of slow progressive change. Of course that all changed when we made threats and gave their leaders the ability to stand up to the "foreigners" making threats... now the people's support of their government is growing.

Why can't we understand that people in other countries love their country as much as we do, and they don't take kindly to outsiders dictating or making threats!


Ralph Deeds profile image

Ralph Deeds 8 years ago Author

Thanks. We're pretty much on the same wavelength.

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working