Debate Club

Did the U.S. Withdraw from Iraq Too Soon? >

We Should Have Left Iraq Far Sooner

The United States should never have invaded in the first place

January 23, 2012

About Christopher Preble:

Christopher Preble is the vice president for foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute.

Leaving Iraq was a wise decision; we should have left far sooner. The United States has gained little from the war, and the benefits will never approach what we expended in blood and treasure. Indeed, the war likely undermined American security, and would continue to do so if we had left our troops there for another decade, or more, as some of the most fervent advocates for war wanted us to do.

[Mort Zuckerman: Barack Obama's Middle East Miscalculation.]

Of course, the United States should never have invaded Iraq in the first place. The war was sold on false pretenses, but the most serious flaw in the war advocates' case was their reckless cost estimates. Some claimed that the war would be cost-free, paid for by revenues from Iraqi oil. Others ventured guesses ranging between $50 billion and $200 billion. These absurdly low estimates were sustained by the belief that Iraqi citizens would embrace a foreign military presence. They didn't.

The direct costs of the war totaled nearly $1 trillion, and the costs to care for those injured in the war is likely to exceed $2 trillion. The final tally won't be known for years. We could have spent this money elsewhere—at home, or in the hunt for al Qaeda and other terrorists in countless other places. Withdrawing from Iraq allows us refocus our attention and resources on building our nation here at home, and on addressing the few legitimate security challenges we face.

[See pictures of soldiers returning home from Iraq.]

The troops and their families have paid the dearest price. Over 4,400 Americans were killed in Iraq; nearly 32,000 more were wounded. Many more will carry psychological and emotional scars that don't show up in the official casualty statistics. We do not honor their sacrifice by clinging to the fiction that this mission was vital to U.S. security. It wasn't, but that is the fault of those who sold the war, not of those tasked with fighting it.

No amount of additional sacrifice by our brave men and women in uniform would change the final fundamental truth about Iraq: The Iraqis wanted their country back. Now they have it. I wish them well.

 

Tags:
military strategy,
military,
Iraq war (2003-2011),
Iraq
Other Arguments
#1

Yes — The U.S. must pressure Iraq to avoid a new sectarian civil war

ROBERT ZARATE, Policy Director of the Foreign Policy Initiative

#2

No — The war should never have been launched--so it can't be ended soon enough

PHYLLIS BENNIS, Director of the New Internationalism Project at the Institute for Policy Studies

#4

No — Mission to promote "democracy" in Iraq was an unobtainable objective

DANIEL J. GALLINGTON, Senior Policy and Program Adviser at the George C. Marshall Institute

#5
#6
#7

Yes — Iraq might take 15 or 20 years to become a functioning democracy

MICHELE DUNNE, Director of the Atlantic Council's Rafik Hariri Center for the Middle East

#8

Yes — The real winner in the Middle East will be Iran

HELLE DALE, Senior Fellow in Public Diplomacy Studies at the Heritage Foundation

#9

Yes — Pulling the covers over our eyes and leaving the region is not a thought-through strategy

THOMAS HENRIKSEN, Senior Fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution and at the U.S. Joint Special Operations University

#10

Yes — The president, in his own words, wanted to fulfill a campaign promise

DANIELLE PLETKA, Vice President for Foreign and Defense Policy Studies at the American Enterprise Institute

#11
#12

No — The Iraq War cost the United States 4,421 lives and $806 billion

DENNIS KUCINICH, U.S. Representative, Ohio's 10th District

Reader Comments Read all comments (1)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

I think that we shoudl've stayed because then we could kill the potential threat of them attackin again they want to kil america guys

JT L of IL 11:27AM May 15, 2012

About Debate Club

A meeting of the sharpest minds on the day's most important topics, Debate Club brings in the best arguments and lets readers decide which is the most persuasive. Read the arguments, then vote. And be sure to check back often to see who has gotten the most support—and also to see what's being discussed now in the Debate Club.


Have ideas about what the Club should be debating? E-mail it to dclub@usnews.com.


You can also join the debate on Facebook or follow Debate Club on Twitter.

Advertisement
Cartoons
Thomas Jefferson Street Blog
Romney's Bain Experience Wasn't Real American Capitalism

The fact that Bain Capital served to make money for investors, not to create jobs, could endanger Romney.

Why Is Mitt Romney Embracing Birther Donald Trump?

Maybe Trump is Romney's idea of a rich guy that common people can relate to?

Does Barack Obama Actually Want to Be Re-Elected?

The president's lack of enthusiasm jeopardizes his campaign.

3 Reasons Why the Scott Walker Wisconsin Recall Election Matters

Scott Walker is a canary in a coal mine.

The Right's Fixation With 'Vetting' Obama

American voters can use the past four years to judge Obama's qualifications as president

Voters Tuning Out Flood of 2012 Super PAC, Campaign Ads

This will be the year of grassroots voters, not Nielsen families.

Scott Walker's Union Fight Helps Mitt Romney Against Barack Obama

The Wisconsin governor refuses to back down from his opposition to collective bargaining.

Why Is It Only Women Who Need 'Informing' on Reproductive Health?

Men's sexual behavior could also use some "controlling."

Advertisement