Americans Want a Rapid Exit from Iraq but Elected Leaders Aren’t Even Considering It

Tweet

Dahr Jamail, a top reporter on Iraq, reports on December 28, in an article entitled “More Troops but Less Control in Iraq,” that “Through the occupation, each time the U.S. has increased troop levels, there has been a corresponding increase in attacks on the forces, and consequently an increase in civilian casualties.” Thus, rather than learning from past experience, the Bush administration, with a compliant Congress, is likely to repeat past mistakes.

On December 6, James Baker, the co-chair of the Iraq Study Group, even admitted to Anderson Cooper on CNN that removal of U.S. troops may reduce the violence.

COOPER: And is it possible that getting the U.S. troops out will actually lessen that violence, that it will at least take away the motivation of nationalist insurgents?

BAKER: Many people have argued that to us. Many people in Iraq made that case.

COOPER: Do you buy it?

BAKER: Yes, I think there is some validity to it, absolutely. Then we are no longer seen to be the occupiers.

Despite the fact that a U.S. withdrawal is likely to reduce the violence, Baker concluded: “We're still going to have a very robust—forced presence in Iraq and in the region for quite a number of years after this thing sorts itself out whichever way it sorts itself out. We have to do that because we cannot—we have vital national interests in that region.”

Kevin Zeese in the Baltimore Chronicle via Information Clearinghouse