Help support TMP

"Iraq wants US troops to leave" Topic

19 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.

Back to the Ultramodern Warfare (2009-present) Message Board

Areas of Interest


773 hits since 27 Dec 2018
©1994-2019 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

28mm Fanatik27 Dec 2018 9:35 a.m. PST

It appears we are no longer welcome there.


Irish Marine Supporting Member of TMP27 Dec 2018 10:02 a.m. PST

Funny, I didn't feel welcome when I was there either.

Balthazar Marduk27 Dec 2018 10:31 a.m. PST


Iran no longer welcomes US Troops. Neither party had much choice in hosting them there in the first place. They can cope.

Personal logo PrivateSnafu Supporting Member of TMP27 Dec 2018 1:22 p.m. PST

Sounds good let's bring them home.

Personal logo StoneMtnMinis Supporting Member of TMP27 Dec 2018 2:37 p.m. PST

Considering the source, meh.

Winston Smith27 Dec 2018 2:54 p.m. PST

We conquered Iraq fair and square. Who do they think they are?

raylev327 Dec 2018 3:10 p.m. PST

The Iraqi politicians that were quoted were Iran backed or part of the Shia part led by al Sardr. No surprise; the Shia side, especially those supported by Iran, has never been happy with us there.

Sunnis are much happier with us, except for the ISIS supporters.

But it's all a mess. Sunni vs. Shia, Arab vs. Persian, and Kurds vs. all the rest.

Thresher01 Supporting Member of TMP27 Dec 2018 10:10 p.m. PST

A pity Iran's leadership wasn't dealt with immediately after that of Iraq.

A missed opportunity.

darthfozzywig Supporting Member of TMP27 Dec 2018 11:44 p.m. PST

LOL no. Iran has a population twice that of Iraq's (and not inclined to welcome US interference) with much more difficult terrain to boot. Invading Iran would have been even dumber than our other wasteful occupations.

Lion in the Stars28 Dec 2018 12:17 a.m. PST

Agreed, Iran is more of the same nasty mountains as Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Short of pounding the entire area below sea level, there's no way you're going to actually conquer it.

And I really don't want to destroy it. On 9/11, when most of the Arab world was joyously chanting "aloha snackbar", the Iranian people showed up for enormous solemn candlelight vigils to pray for the dead.

I'm not too fond of Iranian politicians. I'm not yet willing to take that out on the Iranian people.

Patrick Sexton Supporting Member of TMP28 Dec 2018 8:49 a.m. PST

What Lion said.

28mm Fanatik28 Dec 2018 9:06 a.m. PST

The only reason Iran is considered to be an enemy is due to its rivalry with Israel and anti-western stance after the corrupt and brutal Shah regime was overthrown. Despite being ruled by Ayatollahs, Iran is more open and democratic than US allies such as Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. It is a double standard of sorts necessitated by realpolitik.

USAFpilot28 Dec 2018 12:47 p.m. PST

The US should bring its troops home from many places around the world. Not because other countries say so, but because it is good policy.

Winston Smith28 Dec 2018 3:12 p.m. PST

I've always heard that once the US becomes "energy independent" that we could just tell the whole Middle East to go pound sand. Figuratively speaking, that is.
Once we don't have to jump to what the sheiks and mullahs say, we don't have to hang around to prop up despicable regimes.

As of this year, thanks to fracking, the US is allegedly the top producer of fossil fuels in the whole world!
So, why are we still there?
I say, let those still depending on Middle East oil send their troops to God-forsaken you know what holes.
We've done our bit.

28mm Fanatik28 Dec 2018 3:48 p.m. PST

Why are we still there indeed.

The official reason is our continuing post-9/11 "War Against Terrorism" of course, but when does it end? The popular beltway answer is "until terrorism is defeated" obviously. But the thing is, like cockroaches, terrorism can never be entirely eradicated. It can be contained, degraded and reduced until it no longer poses much of a threat, but there's always the possibility that it may come back in some form or other in the future. Does that mean we should keep a substantial military presence in the region forever? The POTUS doesn't believe so, but most politicos disagree, be they liberal internationalists like Hillary or neo-conservatives like George W. Bush. I commented on the Syrian withdrawal in another thread, which is excerpted below:

The Washington political establishment, which includes Congress and the Pentagon and entrenched politicians in both parties, has become the proverbial "tail that wags the dog." There are no compelling reasons for the US to maintain a large military presence in the ME, yet because we've been there for so long, it's becoming harder and harder to leave because bureaucratic inertia had set in. Politicians and bureaucrats have turfs, departments and budgets to protect.

The resignation of the so-called Anti-ISIS point man, Brett McGurk, is a prime example. His resignation "in protest" is portrayed by the media as if it's in defiance of Trump, when the reality is that, by ordering the troop withdrawal from Syria, he was effectively fired because his job description and raison d'etre as liason to the various groups fighting the remnants of ISIS no longer exist, which means if he didn't resign we're paying the salary of a lame duck.

Trump was elected to buck the Establishment and drain the swamp, and that's exactly what he's trying to do even if he's becoming increasingly all alone and the swamp eventually ends up draining him.

hocklermp528 Dec 2018 3:52 p.m. PST

End the horrible waste of lives and national treasure. Forever War is madness.

torokchar Supporting Member of TMP28 Dec 2018 8:48 p.m. PST

I have deployed there twice – horrible country and people – we should have left years ago! Total waste of time, money and lives.

Lion in the Stars28 Dec 2018 11:06 p.m. PST

As of this year, thanks to fracking, the US is allegedly the top producer of fossil fuels in the whole world!
So, why are we still there?

Because petroleum is a commodity. Until the supply in the Middle East runs completely out (or at least until OPEC produces less than 10% of the world oil supply), they are able to really play havoc with the price of fuel.

raylev302 Jan 2019 1:50 p.m. PST

You basic assumption is that we went into Iraq for the oil. It was far more complicated than that and based on multiple false assumptions. The reality is that even when we were in Iraq, non-US companies were getting most of the oil related contracts.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.