Iraq: To leave or to stay?
by Stephen Lacey

(Dec. 1, 2005)

 

     It seems the question on everybody's lips these days is not if we will win the war in Iraq, but when we will get out. President Bush delivered his update on the military effort today. As usual, not much was said. He gave no specifics on withdrawal except to say that American troops would continue to train Iraqis. He says that a hasty withdrawal will be detrimental to American national security in the long run. He says that American troops will stay until they have finished, or until the Iraqi government tells us to leave. Unfortunately, I agree with Bush that this is the best option. It is obvious that we never should have gone to war in the first place. All the arguments that lead us into war have been debunked. Even the argument that the White House and Pentagon are still using--that we are fighting the War on Terror in Iraq so we don't have to fight it on American soil-- doesn't stand up. The War in Iraq has acted as a recruiting tool for Muslim extremists all around the world. Not only are American troops in harms way, but American citizens should have more to fear. In the face of all these concerns, politicians and citizens are calling for a proposed timetable for withdrawal. But we shouldn't be too hasty. We have already done enough damage. The last thing we need is for a civil war to break out between Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds after Americans leave. We need to ensure that the government and military can stand on their own feet. When either or both of these tasks are completed, America can leave Iraq. Although I was vehemently opposed to the invasion and occupation of Iraq, I must agree with the president on the issue of withdrawal. We can't be to hasty. But we can't just ignore the problem either.


Stephen Lacey
News Director, 105.3 WFPC-LP
Franklin Pierce College
VM- (603) 899-4100 x.2892
Home Phone- (603) 352-7470

 

 

THE EXCHANGE
"Gosh, it's swell."