Iraq Extraction

The moment that President George W. Bush declared war on Iraq, the United States was bound to a burdening ideal of bringing freedom and democracy into a country that had been torn by a ruthless dictatorship. To this day, the maintaining of this responsibility has continued to be a problem. The Iraq problem has been one that has been quite possibly the most difficult task our nation has had to face. Immediate extraction of U.S. troops would be an extraordinarily risky move that could have catastrophic consequences such as civil war or an up rise of religious theocracy. On the other hand, nation building in Iraq could be costly and mean more U.S. casualties during the reconstruction process. With those two most basic options out of the way, we are left with somewhat narrowed choices. Obviously the best choice is somewhere in between "nation-building" and "immediate extraction". The best possible plan for leaving Iraq would be to gradually decrease U.S. presence over the next five years because it would allow the United States time to develop the country a good amount without overstaying our welcome and spending too much money on the improvement of Iraq.

Perhaps the most liberal of the options for a U.S. policy in Iraq would be the immediate removal of all U.S. presence in Iraq. This policy shows potential in that it would not only save money, but it will also save our nation billions of dollars in government spending. Promising as it may be, this option proves to be more flawed than favorable. First of all, America would lose all of its chances to relieve the costs of the war with oil money gained from Iraqi oil fields. We have not yet had much of a chance to salvage oil in Iraq because of repeated sabotages on oil fields. Immediately leaving would also cause a power vacuum that could greatly threaten Iraq. As the country is divided into several groups, civil war could break out quite easily amongst the Sunnis, the Kurds, and the Shiites. This would prove to be even more devastating than if U.S. occupation would continue. The only difference would be that no American troops would likely be harmed. Another byproduct of the leadership vacuum would be the rise of a religious theocracy. As a predominantly Muslim country, Iraq is susceptible to theocratic government. The people of Iraq feel it needed to govern their country based on religious beliefs and if that were to become a reality, the United States' goal of gaining democracy in Iraq would be demolished. All work that was previously handled by the United States would have been in vain. These flaws in mind, the immediate extraction of U.S. troops in Iraq would be an irresponsible policy.

A second, more liberal policy at handling the problem would be called nation-building.

...