ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel

805 Billion Spent, 4500 Killed: America Exits from Iraq

Updated on October 21, 2011

Iraq is known for being the cradle of civilization, yet, it was just that it was unable to have for eight years. President Obama thinks that leaving Iraq now, with no American troops remaining, will help elect him in another year for he promised to end the Iraq war.

He knows the gamble. He knows he is rolling the dice and hoping for "snake eyes" because leaving an unstable Iraq is iffy at best. Yet, Obama is a man of his word-right or wrong. If he is wrong, God forbid the mess coming. Iraq cannot fend for itself militarily nor in its police force. It is well documented. PM Maliki, Iraq's leader, actually wanted the US to stay longer into 2012-13, with fewer troops to provide a safe transition. He knows they are not ready. Yet, the Iraqi parliament, now occupied with half pro-Iranian or anti-American positions, voted for all US troops to leave and if any stayed, there would be no immunity for their actions under the cover of "military". Obama tried to insist on immunity, if the US was to stay, but despite Maliki's attempt to sway the positions of its members, he failed.

Iraq in 2012, will face a bad fate. Iran did not wait for the US to leave, they were already in the Parliament and voted in via democracy by those more extreme elements. Some of the extreme groups in Iraq are very well armed and some have Scud-Missiles, which recently were fired at Kuwaits new port that is being built. The Iraqi police or military are pathetic without American troops, for the most part. Iran will now test the water by challenging Iraqi forces over water and oil rights near the border-some things do not change. With America out of the way, Iran will press all the Iraqi buttons to see how they react before they do something far worse like seize parts of Iraq. Think, what would Iraq do? They have no real military force when compared to Iran. I am sure Iran is looking at Iraq like a lion seeking prey: easy target. In 2012, Iran will have four atomic bombs. How would Iraq respond to that threat? How would Iraq respond to Iranian air attacks? Iraq has no real airforce. No doubt, the USA will be called for help, so why, then, leave? Why not leave a small force as a buffer.

While the war is over, Iraq is not ready to handle anything. They cannot even provide electricity to its citizens for 24\7. At most, some areas only get 8-10 hrs. The sewer is deplorable as is the Tigris River. Terror attacks have not gone, they will no doubt now switch targets to Iraqis to destabilize the government. And who might the terrorist be? Iran, has the most to gain.

This will be a decision that Obama wished he had not made. In the short term, it looks great and for the US forces there, it is. But for those in intelligence, they know the worse is still yet to come.

Comments

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • MG Singh profile image

      MG Singh 5 years ago from Singapore

      An excellent write up. America has cooked its goose in Iraq, thanks to George Bush. I wonder whether withdrawing now is the right decision.

    • quotations profile image

      Robert P 5 years ago from Canada

      Part of the problem, I think, is America's practice of creating puppet governments to legitimize its occupation and to hand over the fighting to their armies. It did not work in Vietnam and did not work in Iraq. Billions are wasted on training inept native forces and billions more are lost through corrupt local officials. I think we would get much better results and the locals might even respect us more if we simply occupied and reformed the entire country much like Germany after WW2. The attempt to impose a functioning government on the foundation of a quasi medieval barbaric society is doomed to failure.

    • FGual profile image

      FGual 5 years ago from USA

      Bring 'em home, it's long overdue and how many more beyond 4500 would we lose? Saddam is gone and their new government is now in place, for better or worse. Let the Iraqis get it together on their own.

    • perrya profile image
      Author

      perrya 5 years ago

      well, yes, let them try, but as what was originally plan, have minimal US forces there to help and deter. After WW2, we stayed in germany for 30 yrs.

    • vrajavala profile image

      vrajavala 5 years ago from Port St. Lucie

      Sec of State Bolton thinks it just shows the failure of negotiations, and that Iran will most certainly take advantage of the vacuum.

      Bolton gave the example "what if we had left Germany 9 years after WW II?"

      Better to leave some forces there.

    • perrya profile image
      Author

      perrya 5 years ago

      What happened in South Vietnam in 1975, will be repeated, but it will be far worse.

    • Hmrjmr1 profile image

      Hmrjmr1 5 years ago from Georgia, USA

      Concur Perrya I think the slaughter of the Sunnis and Kurds will be on a whole new level,Turkey Saudi and Jordan are about to be inundated with refugees. IF they can get out before it is too late.

    • vrajavala profile image

      vrajavala 5 years ago from Port St. Lucie

      I think Trump made the point that to the victors belong the spoils. I'n the case if Iraq, the US got nothing out of it. At least we should have .50 gas.

    • perrya profile image
      Author

      perrya 5 years ago

      well, we did get Saddam Hussien

    • swordsbane profile image

      William Grant 5 years ago from Wisconsin

      I'm the last person to either condone the war on Iraq or to support imperialism, but leaving now is a BAD IDEA. There is ample evidence that Iraq is not yet ready to protect themselves or to root out the insurgents in their own country. We should have cleaned their house a long time ago and already left, but we didn't and throwing our hands up and saying "Good enough" when it clearly isn't is worse.

    Click to Rate This Article