I agree with tomahawk6. I believe that we have to leave Iraq with a base of people capable of fighting off Iranian, Syrian and Turkish advances. That's the only reasonable exit strategy. To leave now would assure a far more brutal occupation and wider war, this could spread to our Nato allies, ensnaring Canada deeper into the conflict. If we fail to plant the seed of hope and responsibility in Afghanistan and Iraq, you can bet there will be someone else who will. I also agree with the US approch on the situation, (dissolving the army). On the other hand something should have been done to make sure those formerly uniformed had something to do with their now abundant free time. The British approch worked well to serve their own beliefs that they were minimizing casualties and creating a peaceful environment, but of course, you dont make deals with the devil and come out unscathed. Of course, eventually the situation must be handed over to the Iraqis, but thats the key point in the debate. Who are the Iraqis? Do we consider those loyal to a foreign power capable of being agents for Iraq? Certainly, the only way to guarentee the power of Iraq stays in Iraq is to leave with a strong police and military. If we leave Iraq now, not only do we surrender a lot of moral authority in Afghanistan (for creating a democratic society), but we embolden terrorists worldwide. I, personally, tire of advocating my position. I am content to let the left and the right and all of the foreign propagandists sell us out, or even til we start losing territory and allies. I feel it will take a more concentrated attack pattern on nations in the West, including some conventional attacks, for us to fight back, as a nation, in ernest. Leadership can bring about a convincing pull but I don't see it happening. I see a defeatist attitude seeping into conservative thought recently, including the general. It really is that. Now, that being said, it's backed by a lot of evidence that we should leave. The problem is the shortsightedness of it. Yes, the insurgency is adapting and getting organized, fueled by terrorists and foreign powers. Yes, casualties continue, but can we imagine the chaos if there is a general retreat without anything to fill the void? How quick it would spill over. The media would also project this pattern onto Afghanistan, effecting our mission there (we left Iraq, we should leave Afghanistan too). Personally, as I said, I'm tired of trying to advocate for people that my fellow canucks have a hard time relating to. Rest assured, if Afghanistan were a province of Canada, in Canada, involving Canadians being subject to strict Shar'ia law.. we'd have a far different reaction. So maybe that's what it will take.tomahawk6 said:I am not ready to write off Iraq as a failure,to do so would cheapen the sacrifice of so many. For their sake we need to see Iraq through to some type of successful conclusion. The only way we can lose in my opinion is if we quit,like we did in Vietnam. The enemy cannot defeat us on the battlefield. Their only hope like Vietnam is to persuade us to quit. We dont have the huge anti-war movement that forced us to quit. I think most americans want victory. People must realize that each time you quit you embolden the enemy. At some point the enemy is on our doorstep and we either surrender or fight and the price will be far higher. We have a chance to stop radical islam on a critical front. A victory in Iraq will be huge but it wont happen quick enough for some.