What is our current exit strategy from Iraq?

CH (MAJ) William Beaver — Wed, 13 May 2015 00:03:02 -0400

Well, it may seem alot different now.....but we are back in Iraq. So....what sort of exit strategy do we have with Iraq now?

Response by PO1 Jason Taylor made May 13 at 2015 12:04 AM

PO1 Jason Taylor — Wed, 13 May 2015 00:04:27 -0400

You know as well as the rest of us, we will be there forever!

Response by SPC Angel Guma made May 13 at 2015 12:32 AM

SPC Angel Guma — Wed, 13 May 2015 00:32:21 -0400

Exit strategy should be this. Either we should get serious with permanent garrisons there, like Germany, permanently disband the militias, and seal off Iraq's border with Iran (absolutely not political points)- or we stop the air campaign, pack up now, cut off all aid (even .05 cents worth of aid is too much), and go home.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 13 at 2015 12:47 AM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 13 May 2015 00:47:33 -0400

Sadly the Treaty of Balfour severely dismantled the region in terms of different ethnic groups throughout the Middle East. Indeed, the crumbling of the old empires across the world had probably left the biggest problem set by establishing nation-states with illogical borders. We will continue to answer the call to return to Iraq due to the guilt at having not stabilized the region. Truthfully this is a problem best left to the different ethnic groups within the region. Iraq will continue to suffer the chaos that other newly independent states have suffered since the stability of the Cold War has ended. I believe we should exit after we have established a trusteeship of nations within the region to help Iraq along. A timetable would be in order and unfortunately the major players wuld have to be Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Iran, with the US in an infrastructure and monetary support role. Otherwise Iraq will be easy prey for any regime that covets its wealth.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 13 at 2015 1:19 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 13 May 2015 01:19:57 -0400

Stagecoach or a Checkered Cab.

Response by SPC Charles Brown made May 13 at 2015 2:19 AM

SPC Charles Brown — Wed, 13 May 2015 02:19:22 -0400

Walk out the front door, lock it from the outside, nail the door shut, drop the keys in the sand miles from anyone, and walk the f away leaving the inmates in charge of their own asylum.

Response by SGT Jeremiah B. made May 13 at 2015 3:03 AM

SGT Jeremiah B. — Wed, 13 May 2015 03:03:56 -0400

Arm and support the Kurds, let the Shia and Sunni duke it out until everyone has the realization that maybe, just maybe, trying to preserve lines on a map drawn by white guys a long time ago isn't the best way to do things.

Iraq will stabilize once it no longer exists. We're just going to have to convince Turkey and Shia Iraq that a wholly independent Kurdistan is for the best.

Response by SCPO David Lockwood made May 13 at 2015 5:59 AM

SCPO David Lockwood — Wed, 13 May 2015 05:59:28 -0400

We will be there fo as long as it takes to rid the region and the world of ISIS. Unfortunately we have no idea as to how long this will take. Hopefully the other middle eastern countries will wake up see there is a major threat, that is not the US, to their livelihood who has no regard to life and does not care what religious faith you are.

Response by Cpl Jeff N. made May 13 at 2015 6:56 AM

Cpl Jeff N. — Wed, 13 May 2015 06:56:02 -0400

I'd be more interested in seeing our Victory Strategy. We worry more about getting out (Exit Strategy) that getting the job done sometimes (mostly politicians).

I am not sure anyone has articulated our strategy in Iraq clearly. We are hitting ISIS sites ad hoc. We have some forces on the ground but not enough to do any realy damage. Iran is in Iraq, the Russians support Iran. We have foreign fighters (ISIS) all over a large swath. Atrocities out the wazoo. A situation created by our departure from there with no stabilizing force (you can argue the merits of a residual force).

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made May 13 at 2015 7:08 AM

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 13 May 2015 07:08:23 -0400

I agree with Cpl Jeff N. , what is our victory strategy? If victory isn't the goal, that's fine, but what is the strategic goal? Without clearly defined goals it's very difficult to plan anything.

Response by CPO Greg Frazho made May 13 at 2015 1:35 PM

CPO Greg Frazho — Wed, 13 May 2015 13:35:39 -0400

Let's call it what it is: we should've never left in the first place. The nay-sayers will say we should've never BEEN there in the first place. All good and fine, but that's academic at this point. We went in in 2003 after trying to forment a collapse from within after Desert Storm.

We made some mistakes. The CPA proved to be ineffective. We did a de-Ba'ath-ifaction of the political system which indirectly led to the insurgency, which itself led to the surge. Saddam and company are dead or ineffective now, but we inadvertently created a power vacuum that both Shia and Sunni sects have exploited.

Now we find ourselves in a bizarre hate triangle, perhaps even a quadrangle: Shia influence, backed by Iran, Sunni influence, spearheaded by ISIS as well as the Turks, Kurds and Syrians on the periphery or getting in the mix depending on what day of the week it is. In a lot of ways, this is the complete opposite of what we wanted: stability to protect the oil trade.

Mattis' talk on how and why Desert Storm was such a success is spot on: there were clearly stated and clearly understood political objectives and conditions that predicated the entire operation. That's why it was the post-WWII anomaly.

Response by PO1 Glenn Boucher made May 13 at 2015 1:39 PM

PO1 Glenn Boucher — Wed, 13 May 2015 13:39:55 -0400

I have a strong feeling there is no exit strategy. I think one thing we can do is to stop arming all of the various groups who are the favorite of the moment.
Stop trying to reshape foreign governments into democracies and let these people run their own country because obviously their leaders do not want any real advice to bring their countries citizens into the modern world.
I say pull out and let them handle their own problems, they do not seem to want our help or advice but they certainly want our money and weapons.
Never smart to replace a caveman's flint knife with an automatic weapon.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made May 13 at 2015 2:54 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 13 May 2015 14:54:18 -0400

I almost vomited when I read "Soooo....NOW what is our current exit strategy from Iraq?"

I'm reminded of numerous facts, histories, and narrative-tapestries woven-sophomoric by everyone around me. All sounding like experts with rock-solid ideas on how to win/stabilize/whatever. SMs, Veterans, politicians, students, teachers, journalists. . .. Everyone's unique experience and research providing them some key insight that SOMEHOW our leaders just missed. Meanwhile, bodies pile-up.

I'm not going to lie, I'm never going to get my head wrapped around this issue. I will say this: #*%! that place, and everyone who keeps fighting over it. I'd die once or a thousand times over if it brought stability to that cursed place (and just a little of that stability benefited America, of course). But it wouldn't. That's one of the reasons I declined re-enlistment, honestly.

CH (MAJ) William Beaver , my answer, as useless as it is unhelpful: Whatever the exit strategy is, it should happen asap.

Response by SPC David S. made May 13 at 2015 3:30 PM

SPC David S. — Wed, 13 May 2015 15:30:50 -0400

I don't think we will ever get out until the "illegitimate children" of England's and France's menage a trois with the middle east are deliquesced back into the surrounding sands. When WWI ended the Ottoman Empire was sliced up and offered more or less as plunders of war to England and France. No surprise that the interjection of western culture and glaring indifference caused issues with the locals. Because of this approach on foreign policy way back when much of the unrest that we see today is a result of these unhealed wounds. When England and France literally drew lines in the sand and created Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, Israel and Palestine they caused a tremendous about of unrest in the region. And like in so many other places when the cannibals grew restless these guys bolted. So pre WWII we come to the region to lure the Middles East away from Russia in an effort to protect our interest (oil) as well as stem the spread of communism. So as it was with the British and French the Arab Spring comes to full bloom we ourselves having enough bailed only to return to stabilize the region with more war and unrest. All of this is layered on the civil unrest within the Muslim religion as well as the extremist ideology flowing from the region to get us to where we are today.

So in simple terms and to get to my point lets say the region is a milkshake - our foreign policy is shit - and for the last 50 years we have been putting shit into the milkshake and pulverizing it with our blender - the military - expecting the milkshake to get tastier in the process. So now we have 3 choices: drink the milkshake as it is, pick out all the shit or leave it sitting on the counter. All scenarios present their own problems. Drinking it is going to leave a bad taste in our mouth - this is the region telling us what to do, pick out all the shit - could be damn near impossible and result in a long presence in the region or we could leave it on the counter - only delays the inevitable cleanup of the region. So in my opinion our best option at this point is picking all the shit out of our milkshake. No one else is going to want to do it, its going to take time and money, and its going to be hard work but this choice gives us the best chance at enjoying a palatable shake.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made May 13 at 2015 7:57 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Wed, 13 May 2015 19:57:27 -0400

There exists two significant problems: military and nation building. I would propose cordoning the Mosul and Kirkuk area with well placed ground troops and air assets, then attacking the two cities. The only problem is, we only have splintered groups allies capable of providing fighters.

When we left we assumed a National sense of self, an honest Democracy, and a decent military existed. If we are serious when leaving Iraq, those three endeavors must be addressed, or do a quick reset and get the hell out of dodge.

Response by LTC Paul Labrador made May 13 at 2015 8:26 PM

LTC Paul Labrador — Wed, 13 May 2015 20:26:38 -0400

Kill the bad guys until there are no more bad guys. THEN we can talk nation building.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made May 13 at 2015 9:35 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 13 May 2015 21:35:23 -0400

I would like to know what our victory strategy is as well. The problem I have with our current actions is that it seems like we're there just to show we're doing "something." No amount of bombing will defeat ISIS. To effect any meaningful change will require land forces. Unfortunately we don't appear to have the political will to make that commitment, so we're stuck in a state of half-measures. If we're not going to go all the way to victory, why start at all?

Response by LTC Gavin Heater made May 14 at 2015 11:39 PM

LTC Gavin Heater — Thu, 14 May 2015 23:39:04 -0400

I met a British pensioner in London while on leave there in 2004. He said that he did not believe that the American government had the stomach to stay in Iraq or Afghanistan long enough to see generational change. He was over 90 and had served in Iraq, Pakistan and India. His point was a valid one then and still today. Fragile nations often can't stand alone. A coalition government with a combined military from Middle Wastern States seems like thelikely solution.

Response by SPC Jeffrey Bly made May 14 at 2015 11:53 PM

SPC Jeffrey Bly — Thu, 14 May 2015 23:53:34 -0400

The overall best exit strategy would have been to not go back in there at all. We tried. They don't want the help.