Forum: Keep American Troops in Iraq?

To some, me included, it never was time to go to Iraq, let alone extend the occupation to the longest military misadventure in American history, next to Vietnam.

Those shards of history aside, the facts remain that upwards of 135,000 American troops are deployed in Iraq, their future is a key issue in the 2008 presidential election, and their present circumstances are not much different than they’ve been for the past five years: Americans in Iraq are not improving the situation so much as tempering the violent consequences of the very dislocations the American invasion caused.

What to do next?

A strong argument can be made that the American presence in Iraq is the most destabilizing factor in that country. It gives Sunnis and Shiites a foil for their violent dispositions. It gives al-Qaeda a permanent incentive to recruit. It gives neighbors such as Syria and Iran no reason to moderate their stances. It continues to detract from the war on al-Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan. And it detracts from the most crucial hub to peace: the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

The other side of the argument is that the American presence in is part of the war on al-Qaeda, it keeps Sunnis and Shiites from turning into the next Rwanda, and keeps the Middle East from flaming up into a conflict no one can control. I’m extremely skeptical about each of these three claims, which sound more like the self-justification of Washington's hubris than an accurate reading of the situation on the ground.

But my opinion right now isn’t relevant. I’m interested in hearing what you have to say. Let’s hear some views on this in the forum.