Leave as soon as you sensibly can

Iraqis naturally want their country back, and should have it as soon as they think they are ready

See article

Readers' comments


El Lider

The Iraq/Afghanistan invasion are showing us that the crusades are continuein in a different framework. It's legitimate to attack a country that is not a friend of the West. Just disarm it, and strike as hard as you can). Remember the US troops reached Baghdad within a few weeks. 5.5 year after, there still there... The US/UN does it, so killing people is not so bad. Every day, for 5 years long, 50/60 people die from suicide bombings. Those are children, women, mums, dads, sons, daughters, grandma's, grandfathers,... Imagine that in NY or LA, each day 50 people die of violence? How can you say that the US has brought peace in that region? The only purpose is to avoid peace. Avoid every country (except Israel) of having enough power. Put your own men at the lead of those countries. Just look at the facts: there are each day people dying (no christians, so this isn't really problematic for the West) because of the invasion (and the chaos resulting from it). It is an open secret that the move was favoured by the neocons movement, the Jewish lobby and the Israelian state. What strikes me the most is that, only 70 years ago, these people suffered the most from oppression. If the neighbouring countries of Israel act as the same way as Israel does, than the whole world would collapse.

I hope that the sleeping dog won't be awaken (perhaps that's the purpose). Anyway, my only hope is that the countries in the region (like Iran, Turkey, Lebanon, Egypt) get more powerful, in order to force the parties to look for diplomatic solutions. As long as it David(s) against Goliath, diplomacy will fail....


Have Israel and American Jewish Lobby who pressed Bush and other members in the US legislature to invade Iraq given permission to withdraw from Iraq?
Despite threat (in Israeli term) from Iran unsolved?
Hmm..., in 2 years, they can manipulate many things.
Or US tax payers will give another extra money and arms to Israel to satisfy them?
Let's see.

Sri Prabhat

US military and its reluctant "coalition of the willing"(both soverign governments and hedeonistic business mongers) are exposed for their inefficiencies.
When they came in irresponsibly discarding world community;and UN boasting fake intelligence reports;its was bad.
But,Before leaving they should own up the mess they have created ,and should make a sustainble withdrawal plan ,keeping Un as the monitoring authority.UN should take up this responsibility of rebuilding Iraq Again.


Yonkers, New York
01 September 2008

There cannot be any serious quarrel regarding the fundamental proposition that an independent and sovereign state, such as Iraq is, has the perfect right to compel foreigners within its territory and more so foreign military troops, to leave the country.

This rule applies not only to U.S. military and civilian personnel now inside Iraq, but also to all members of the so-called "coalition of the willing."

Invoking this right under international law, the Iraqi government led by prime minister Nouri al-Maliki has drawn up its own Withdrawal Timetable for U.S. Forces, giving those forces 24 months within which to exit Iraq.

It does not matter what the security situation in Iraq is right now, nor how it will be in the future; the mandated withdrawal is apparently not contingent on Iraq's security situation.

Mariano Patalinjug


Separation of church and state is a concept not well understood in North Africa, Near East, Middle East, West Asia and Indonesia (parts of China too...). This is not surprising, Europe spent the greater part of the 17th and 18th Centuries achieving that by spilling gallons of blood! Therefore, it is in understanding separation of Church and State where the greatest investment should be made.
When this is achieved and Moslems can live with non Moslems without mental reserve, then the question of riches: oil.
May be Iraq should go the federal way and if that would lead to redrawing of frontiers too bad. This would resolve the problem of how oil wealth is distributed as the federated states would have contribute revenues to the federal government in order to support poorer federated states.
As to the past mistakes, let sleeping dogs lie and lets look at ways of solving them and not accusing one another.
Finally, everyone should have access to the Earth's resources through open markets and free negotiation. It is not wrong to defend one's interests, but it is wrong to do so through corruption, killing or any other form of coercion.
xaire te


i cannot get access to this page from my PC at home (only to reader's comments). is the economist blocking? or someone else?
what shall i do?

Joseph A. Zupo

American troops are still in Iraq more than 5.5 years after the March 2003 invasion/liberation because Shite and Sunni muslims began to kill each other and continue to do so but in lesser numbers. Are the killings down because suddenly these two groups like each other or because of the surge of troops in 2007?

The Economist correctly points out that the Sunni's are underrepresented in both the Government and the security forces. More importantly there is no deal to share the oil revenue. We will have to wait and see if the provincial and parlimentary elections take place. Is there really any progress that can not be connected to the surge?

As to Prime Minister Maliki the expression "that sometimes you have to be careful what you wish for comes to mind".

And when will the U.S. learn to truly act in its own interests like other nations have done since the begining of time. While the Chinese make arrangements with various West Africa Governments to procure future production from those fields we have no such arrangement with Iraq (and of course did not have one with Saudi Arabia and Kuwait after saving them from Saddam Hussein).

The U.S. has to stop worrying about what ungrateful nations like Iraq and the Western Europeans (who have forgotten all about the Nazi's, the Marshall Plan and the Soviets) think and start acting in our own economic interest.

Joseph A. Zupo
Atlanta, Georgia


I have enjoyed reading the comments as much as the main article itself. I am true believer of history and I have learned that historically humans are like animals in a vast jungle. In a jungle, the big animals scare and kill the smaller animals and insects. Here is a list of my conclusions:1. If you face a bigger animal, DO NOT annoy it.2. If you must annoy, then say good bye to your next of kin.3.If the bigger animal is hungry, do not steal its food and try to satisfy its hunger, it will save you from being trampled.4. If you think you are just as powerful, plan your strategy well in advance.Based on the above recommendations, what should be the next steps?Suggest do what Germany and Japan did after USA occupied them. Follow USA's line and improve the economic conditions and create an atmosphere that you are a good boy now.Germany has become one of the richest countries. Who does not want to follow its example? False pride gets you nowhere.


Regarding oil, some individuals seem to think that it flows from Iraqi oilfields directly into American vehicles. Last time I checked, our oil was purchased on the market and American oil companies weren't nationalized. The American government might encourage Iraq to allow its oil to be drilled/purchased by American oil companies, but the market system still works. If we began purchasing 2 million bbl/day from Iraq, 2 million bbl we would have purchased would be released onto the market for others to purchase. Further, if Iraq "refused" to sell the U.S. oil, so what? Some other countries might purchase it, releasing to America the oil the other countries were getting from another source.


To Bin Safi,
you are correct. usa is spending a billion dollars of tax payers money everyday because;
Bush and Cheney could not resist pressures to invade iraq from israel and american Jewish lobby and neocons after 9/11 because mid-term election was near. If you are a politician in the US and if you do not support israel, you know what will happen.
while this very moment the occupation of iraq is so unpopular, many congressman/woman is supporting the withdrawal only tentatively. But you can read what Israelis are observing the situation at

"Pelosi's pro-Israeli dictionary

The Speaker of the House of Representatives has no doubts - Barack Obama Hillary Clinton, and John McCain will all support Israel and the rest is a matter of election-year politics and not real U.S. policy."
and the Zionists are confident of that.

as i sated the previously iraq was not a threat to US and Cond.Rice once stated before the invasion that us can live with Saddam even if he obtained nuke, though it was immediately withdrawn because of strong attacks from her opponents i.e. Neocons,Jewish lobby in usa and was just a fact.

Though israel is much richer country than portugal,your government has been sending billions of the tax you paid and military goods over the years for free of charge and free for use, i.e. it is used to expand jewish settlements in palestine and continue to occupy palestine and oppress Palestinians.

After killing millions of iraqi and pushing 4 million iraquis you cannot leave there worse off?


There Should NEVER be a Hasty Withdrawal ( Hectic Exit ) from Iraq, Especially after a Hasty Invasion.

Colin Powell was Right, that once you Invade Iraq You OWN it.

Meaning that once the Saddam Regime was Toppled, Iraq Became the Responsibility of the Bush Administration!
Meaning that You can't Leave it Worse off than You Found it!!
Meaning that What You Broke, You Must Fix!!!

The Disastrous Invasion & Occupation of Iraq, the installation of Mediocre, Sectarian Governments (Gangs) Guarantees that there will NEVER be a Hasty Exit.
Jokers like Maliki, KNOW that without the US Military Securing their Green Zone, they don't stand a chance in Hell of Surviving in Babylon.

On the other hand, Jokers like McCain think that the "SURGE" is the Answer, and that's Why, WE are Winning in Iraq!!!!
But if Winning in Iraq Continues to Cost Over a $1 Billion per Day, then the American Taxpayer May be Better Off Losing.

Unfortunately, McCain was Right!!!!!

We Will End Up Getting Stuck in this Iraqi Quagmire for the Next 100 Years ( Century ). Even then, Only God Knows if We can Leave Iraq as it Once Was.

The American People (Taxpayers like myself) Cannot Afford this Wanton Waste of Our Hard-Earned Money.]
The American People Cannot Afford this Constant Spilling of Our Youth's Blood ( Our MOST Valuable Resource ).
The American People Cannot Afford to have Senile, Surge- Supporting, Septuagenarians Get into the Oval Office.

The Economist Was Correct ;

" Whatever the arguments over the American-led invasion, it remains the case that a hectic exit would be bad for everyone, especially the Iraqis. "

Mr. Obama , will have to Tread a Fine Line in order to Extricate Us from this Mess that Bush is Leaving him (US) with.

Meanwhile, McCain & Maliki (maybe even Bush) can get together on the Golf Course and Reminisce about the Good Ole days of the "SURGE", and How it Could've Won the War.

Peace, Love & Respect.


to Kaledo;

1.It was a fact that even G.Bush and Cheney were against pre-emptive attack on Iraq despite great pressure from Israel, American Jewish lobby and neocons (mostly Jewish) until 9/11. It was the latter to have lead USA to invade Iraq finally. it was the latter who blocked USA to negotiate with Khatami government and in the end brought about Ahamadinejad government in Iran, which the latte has been strongly preaching to attack.

2.osama became OSAMA because of the unjust and inhuman oppression and occupation by Israel, which USA have unconditionally supported militarily and financially and diplomatically, in Palestine. Iraq had nothing to do with Osama. Saddam was much more eager to sell oil to USA than confronting.

3.Hitler....? At least UK and USA did not invade Germany until Germany invaded Poland.....?

4.Waht is YOUR price for freedom? I am interested to hear.


to sasakiyojiro"good question. How many should die to catch one Hitler?? Would you be ok with 1 million deaths if North Korea were to be set free and eventually end up like South Korea??? Or is 1 million deaths "too high of price" for the millions upon millions that would benefit from having Kim and his tryannical government removed???...just curious........ what is you price for freedom??


Dear Placid, i am in tune with your argument. I am especially in agreement with withdrawing all USA forces from WWII post and putting them where they are needed or sending them home.For example, right now there are : 17,000 troops in UK, 27,000 in France, 47,000 in Japan, 33,000 in Germany and around 5-7,000 in Italy........ why??? WWII is over! All they are doing is providing the bulwark of economic demand in small towns in those countries who profit from having all those US troops there consuming food and energy commodities otherwise not consumed in those areas. The USA needs to re-align its forces to serve modern day realities, by which a more efficient military will certainly surface.


this is all well and good, but what if a sovereign iraq decided it wouldn't supply us with oil (despite the obvious fact that'd be economic suicide) in that case all bets would be off. I think mr. obama is the only one who may respect a truly sovereign iraq


I believe the US should withdraw troops,whenever the Iraqis want them to.I also believe the US should withdraw their troops from all around the world,everybody complains about the US intervention in world affairs.They should withdraw all troops and let each country fend for themselves.


The Economist has silently passed over the biggest single factor in the reduction in deaths - the completion of a program of ethnic cleaning. Those 4 million refugees are the result of it.But even if Iraq turned into a peaceful democracy tomorrow this could not make the invasion anything but an absolute disaster - a million dead is far, far too high a price. And those media complicit in it, such as the Economist, have forfeited all right to be listened to on it.


p.s. you'll never know that the Iraqi government may even beg the U.S to stay in the future if things going badly.


"If Mr Obama wins the presidency, he may prove wisely more elastic in his interpretation of an American withdrawal; Mr McCain still rightly refuses to be hemmed in by deadlines. If Iraq’s leader tells the Americans to go forthwith, they must do so. But that is unlikely to happen in a hurry. Whatever the arguments over the American-led invasion, it remains the case that a hectic exit would be bad for everyone, especially the Iraqis."Withdraw time table is just a campaign talk to get voters. Anything can happen in the future in the unstable Iraq. There is absolutely no guarantee and everyone knows. So plenty of excuses and reasons there for either Obama or McCaine to pick to stay in Iraq. No need to worry your pretty head over it.


AP 28/Aug
"Ahmad Nader Nadery, the head of Afghanistan's Independent Human Rights Commission, said his investigators concluded 91 people were killed in Azizabad: 59 children, 19 women and 13 men" by american bombing.
how many people should die until you catch one Osama?



Products and events


Take our weekly news quiz to stay on top of the headlines

