"Uncertainty Looms Over U.S. Leaving Iraq"

[GreenPartyVoter]

WASHINGTON (AP) - For all the talk about Iraq in the presidential campaign, a crucial question largely has gone unanswered: What would it really take for either President Bush or a President Kerry eventually to bring home U.S. troops?

Both candidates say they are committed to defeating the insurgents, building an Iraqi force that can defend the country and putting Iraq on the road to democracy. What is not clear is what either would do in terms of U.S. troops if those conditions were not achieved fully.

Could U.S. troops ever withdraw, if the insurgency were not crushed but only weakened? How good would Iraqi security forces have to be to be good enough to defend their country? Would it be enough to have a stable Iraqi government if it were elected by only part of the country?

One question no candidate would want to touch is what would happen should the violence escalate. Could there come a point when the situation appeared hopeless, U.S. public opinion had turned against it and the president would have at least to consider a withdrawal or redeployment of U.S. forces?

http://apnews1.iwon.com/article/20041031/D862IBFO0.html

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

1. A lost "war" that will linger because of a lack of courage.

Of course the resistance to our illegal and immoral occupation of another country will escalate. But, neither Bush nor Kerry have the fortitude to admit to the obvious.

The "war", which was really a massacre, was lost the moment the first GI crossed the border into Iraq.

[mike_c]

2. the question "How good would Iraqi security forces have to be..."

"...to be good enough to defend their country?" would be funny if it were not so ignorant and arrogant. I suppose the answer depends on who the "enemy" is-- their fellow Iraqis, who reject the puppet government, or the foreign occupation grinding them under its boot heel.