Why not an Iraqi referrendum on US troop witdrawal?

[goodsamaritan]

This should be appealing to Democrats because the vote would almost certainly be in favor withdrawal. This should also be appealing to Republicans because if Iraq goes to hell after withdrawal, they can just blame the Iraqis for voting us out.

IMO, this is what the anti-war people should be pushing for.

[2/325Falcon]

The Maliki government would wind up going down the crapper faster than a two ton turd and would never let it happen.

[lehighguy]

Democrats don't want the war to end.

DUCY?

[SNOWBALL]

Yes, this is the best way to handle the situation without a doubt, and I'd be willing to support any outcome, as long as the elections aren't seriously rigged.

[Josem]

[ QUOTE ]
Why not an Iraqi referrendum on US troop witdrawal?

[/ QUOTE ]

'cause in representative democracies, people have elections to elect leaders to vote on these issues.

[Phil153]

[ QUOTE ]
The Maliki government would wind up going down the crapper faster than a two ton turd and would never let it happen.

[/ QUOTE ]
Just a small nit, but a two ton turd would probably get caught in the S-bend (if it even went that far).

[warrantofice]

I think it would be far to dangerous to hold a referrendum in Iraq. Although you may actually get a truce for that day and it could possibly lead to so sort of civility between the different sects. the problem is that the US can't leave. If they do than everyone will just kill each other and if thats all that would happen i'm sure the US wouldn't blink an eye, no the problem is that if they leave Iran will likely come and take over the country. This would been that Iran would have more control over the water ways, more control over the oil and america would really be up [censored] creek. IMO

[John Kilduff]

[ QUOTE ]
I think it would be far to dangerous to hold a referrendum in Iraq. Although you may actually get a truce for that day and it could possibly lead to so sort of civility between the different sects. the problem is that the US can't leave. If they do than everyone will just kill each other and if thats all that would happen i'm sure the US wouldn't blink an eye, no the problem is that if they leave Iran will likely come and take over the country. This would been that Iran would have more control over the water ways, more control over the oil and america would really be up [censored] creek. IMO

[/ QUOTE ]

So the U.S. must remain in Iraq, at great expense, indefinitely?

[goodsamaritan]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why not an Iraqi referrendum on US troop witdrawal?

[/ QUOTE ]

'cause in representative democracies, people have elections to elect leaders to vote on these issues.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thats a very weak argument. Just because that's how things do work, that doesn't mean thats how they SHOULD work. BTW, in most US states, which are representative democracies, the voters of the state have the ability to put up any law for a referendum if the proper formalities are met.

[warrantofice]

[So the U.S. must remain in Iraq, at great expense, indefinitely?]

Interesting question. I don't believe that the US had originally intended on stay in Iraq for such a long period of time, and possibly much longer now. I think they originally predicted that their would be some sectarian killing and small bouts of terrorism but they would have large enough forces to control most of it. During this thim would create a new Iraq police and new Iraq army who they would make loyal to the governement that was 'elected'. The problem with actually electing a governement is that the Iraq's would probably have a governement that would have very similar interests and beliefs as Iran, so they would likely become very close neighbors. Which would be a terrible thing the United States. So the US would do what any occupying force does in this situation, basically installs a puppet government under their control.

I think basically they wanted to create a second strategic base similar to their other very close middle east ally Israel, basically a police state. But because they really bungled up the initial invasion, they are up [censored] creek.

So what to do know? Well, they will basically be forced to stay until they can pay the Iraq police/army enough money and be sure that they won't turn on the puppet governement. Also they must be focused enough, and equipped well enough to tackle the Iraq resistance. I think that because this war is still relatively new, i know 7 years or whatever, but compared to the warring in the middle east and other parts of the world its just a baby. So the US is counting on the Iraq resistance to slow do, not completely disappear but start to taper off a bit. I think the killings and bombings will but unable to sustain that type of wanton over an extended period of time, say... another 10 years or so.

So once these killing start to slow the US will have created an Iraqi Armed forces which will be loyal to the US and American dollar which will basically be hired to protect the government that is elected by the defence department. Then the war can be claimed to have finished.

Obv. there are plenty of problems that will get in the way of this plan succeeding, the most pressing will the be US election and the next would be Iran. But not so much war with Iran, but Iran exerting its emerging power over the middle east region with the small possibility of nuclear war heads but the more imment threat of strategic missles that could easily threaten the flow of middle east oil from tanker ships.