There should be no debate about when we get out of Iraq.

[kentuck]

Because we should never have invaded in the first place. The surge was just an excuse to justify a continuing occupation of a country that did not pose any threat to America. "Timelines" and "time horizons" are simple diversions that have no place in the discussion.

The debate should be about how quick we can get our troops out of Iraq. It was wrong to invade that country. The only proper thing to do is to withdraw from that country and to leave them as much security as possible to run their own country. The "surge" is an irrelevant argument.

Iraq has divided along tribal lines. More than 4 million people were forced out of that country. Many of them were professional people, such as doctors. There is no way to spin that as a "victory". It would be immoral and wrong for us to continue this invasion. That is why we have to withdraw our troops as soon as possible.

[Hydra]

1. Of course that's what we should be doing

But that assumes that we are a nation acting in a legal and benevolent fashion.

We won't be leaving until they sign the oil over to us. Count on it.

[jody]

2. Agree re retreat from Iraq but IMO we have a moral duty to support whatever govt. the Iraqis select

to replace our occupation government.

IMO that includes air support for perhaps a decade and logistics support for five years or more.

Turn combat operations over to the Iraqis but there is an expensive role remaining for the U.S. and congress should debate and monitor how our dollars are spent and wasted.

[stray cat]

3. Lets not think or use common sense because we already committed one wrong?