Exit Strategy

Two weeks ago, a bipartisan group of Congressmen (4 in total) proposed that President Bush offer up a time frame for the US military to exit Iraq. Their proposal doesn’t seek a specific day and time like “December 13th, 2007 at 12 noon,” but rather follows a schedule based on certain progressions or steps. The proposal has been met with much opposition and criticism. The sound byte that we continuously hear from the Right is that setting a tentative date for US troops to exit Iraq would “send the terrorists the wrong message.” I happen to believe, however, that setting a tentative time schedule for our troops to come home is the logical thing to do.

Before I get too deep into this topic, let me set one thing straight. Many of these terrorists that we would be “sending the wrong message” to are only “terrorists” because we (the US troops) are there in their country. These people are more accurately known as insurgents, and even more specifically identified as Iraqi Nationals. These are people that are just pissed off because when they wake up in the morning, they see US tanks strolling down their streets, patrolling their neighborhoods. What the Bush Administration has successfully done is thrown these people in the same pot with the real terrorists that are only there to wreak havoc on whomever they will. It is important that this distinction is made because these people will not continue fighting once the US leaves. Therefore, by setting a schedule for US troops to exit Iraq, we would be sending the “right” message to this brand of insurgent.

Now let’s take a brief history lesson. The USA didn’t set a tentative schedule for moving out of Vietnam during the Vietnam War until the late 60’s. During that period when an exit date was given and troops began to pullout of Vietnam (1968-1972), the resistance by the Vietcong (what we’d call insurgents today) began to recede. So if it worked then, why wouldn’t it work now? And I know that may seem like a silly question to ask, but seriously, “staying the course” in Iraq doesn’t seem to be perturbing the insurgents anymore today than it did 2 years ago.

Our history lesson need not be so far-reaching in years. Let’s take this current War in Iraq for example. Two specific dates have been set for major changes in Iraq to occur, and both went off without a hitch. The 1st happened just over a year ago, when the USA turned over control of Iraq to the Iraqi people. The 2nd instance happened 6 months ago, when the USA set a specific date for free Iraqi Elections.

In both instances, the specific date was set months in advance. Virtually everyone feared that a major bloodbath was going to occur at the hands of the insurgents and terrorists-especially during the elections. No mighty battles occurred despite the fact that the terrorists had the chance to wait in the wings and prepare themselves to cause destruction because a specific date was indeed set. So if a time table (and a specific date) worked before during this current War, why wouldn’t it work again with respect to pulling out our troops?

Finally, I’d just like to ask this simple question: What mission has the military EVER performed where they had no idea of when they wanted to have it completed? For that matter, what conscious person just tries something new without an idea of when they might want to end it? For example, you don’t start a career job and never give thought to what age you want to retire by. One doesn’t just enter College and not have an idea of when they want to graduate. Why not? Well, there are many reasons, and probably the biggest reason has to do with money. It costs too much money to just sleepwalk your way through college. Likewise, it is costing the US hundreds of Billions of dollars to fight this “no-end-in-sight” War in Iraq.

We can lay out a time schedule for something as insignificant as how long our
summer vacation is going to be, or how much time we plan to spend at the grocery
store. But you mean to tell me that we aren't going to have a tentative
time table concerning something as major as a War?

And, if not naming a move-out of Iraq date sends the wrong message to the terrorists, what kind of message is it sending to the Iraqi citizens? Isn’t that sending the message that we’ll stay in your country and leave when we feel like it? Isn’t staying in Iraq indefinitely diametrically opposite of the originally stated mission as outlined by Bush in his 2003 State of the Union address? Weren’t we supposed to be in Iraq for 2 years and then done?

See, here’s the problem: The longer we’re there, the more it’s going to cost us financially and casualty-wise. We have the highest budget and trade deficits in our history, and the value of a dollar is diving. Daily our troops are being targeted by insurgents and the death toll keeps rising. So, I will go farther than the Congressmen that think there should be an outline to follow that will give us a time schedule of when to leave Iraq. I think we should set a specific date to leave Iraq by. This will force the USA to push harder to train the Iraqi security forces while limiting the number of tours our servicemen have to make. Ultimately, it will prove to the Iraqi people and the rest of the world that our reasons for being there in Iraq are truly magnanimous, and once our mission is done, we will return sovereignty to them.

I also think we should set a specific exit date because in my opinion, any terrorists that are going to wait in the wings for the USA to leave are going to wait no matter if we leave tomorrow or if we leave in seven and a half years. Plus (here’s the other completely stupid implication that the Bush administration makes when they say we shouldn’t set a date to leave Iraq), whenever the US does decide to leave Iraq, the terrorists and insurgents (and the whole dang planet) will know it. It’s not like we can just one day “poof” and disappear from Iraq without the terrorists knowing it. So at some point we’ll have to announce that we’re leaving anyways. And even if we could, don’t you think the insurgents will know it when we do? I mean, how stupid an implication to make.

So you ask yourself this question: Can we really afford to blindly wander our way to an exit from Iraq? Considering the Billions of dollars we are spending (upwards of $300 Billion), and the thousands of US lives we have lost (not to mention the tens and tens of thousands of Iraqi citizen casualties), can we move on aimlessly like this?

Is it worth it?

-Maelstrom