Exiting Iraq: Why the U.S. Must End the Military Occupation and Renew the War Against Al Qaeda

by Chris Preble

With the continuing U.S. occupation of Iraq, a special task force of scholars and policy experts calls into question the Bush administration's intention to stay as long as necessary. In this joint statement, the members argue that the presence of troops in Iraq distracts attention from fighting Al Qaeda and emboldens a new class of terrorists to take up arms against the United States. The task force's findings are essential reading for anyone concerned...

• Format: Paperback
• Language: English
• ISBN: 1930865643
• ISBN13: 9781930865648
• Release Date: June 2004
• Publisher: Cato Institute
• Length: 98 Pages
• Weight: 0.31 lbs.
• Dimensions: 0.3" x 5.5" x 8.5"

Customer Reviews

Slightly out of date but still useful

This is a somewhat old book and is thus slightly out of date, but with that said it is still very valuable. This book focuses primarily on the pragmatic issues surrounding the war in Iraq. They first present several key reasons we should leave Iraq (it doesn't advance our national security, the goal of a democratic Iraq is unrealistic, etc.) and then explain how to get out. This book isn't very long but still manages to provide a lot of information. They cover many of the basic reasons for withdrawing, although they naturally had to leave many issues out. For example, they focused mostly on pragmatic issues and not so much on moral issues like just war theory. In general, they don't focus too much on whether the war was justified in the first place; rather, their central question is "what should we do about the war in Iraq now?" They argue that U.S. interests must be the primary concern in this debate, and that the war's just not in our interest. This book raises quite a few interesting - and hard - questions like "is a democratic Iraq necessarily in our best interest?" The authors argue that there's no reason to believe a democratic Iraq will necessarily be any less anti-American than a totalitarian Iraq, and a stable democracy in the area is not realistic anyway, so it shouldn't be a precondition for withdrawing. To put it a different way, what happens if the Iraqis elect an anti-American government? Or what if they try to attain WMD too? Do we invalidate the elections and thus prove the democracy to be a sham and the government to be a puppet or do we attack them again and replace it with still another government? The neocons have been assuming, without justification, that democracies don't fight each other for years and that a democratic government will necessarily be favorable to our interests; I'm glad someone challenged them. While calling for withdrawal, they are realistic about the risks of doing so. They fully acknowledge that withdrawing carries with it certain risks (which it does), but they point out that staying has risks associated with it too. They also spend a chapter addressing the perpetual question of "how do we get out?" Although this book won't provide you with the most up-to-date information about the situation in Iraq and some of the material seems a little dated now (for example, their proposed date for withdrawal has long since come and gone), this book is still a worthwhile and thought-provoking read and is a very good contribution to the debate. No matter which side you're on, you owe it to yourself to read this book.

Excellent case for withdrawing from Iraq

The authors realistically define vital US security interests as `protecting the lives and well-being of Americans'. So they urge the USA to cut its losses, withdraw from Iraq and respect its sovereignty and independence. "The United States must promptly end its military occupation of Iraq. A military withdrawal will maximize America's ability to refocus its efforts on the fight against Al Qaeda and other anti-American terrorist groups with global reach and, at the same time, minimize the risks to vital US national security interests." "There is no economic imperative for keeping troops there. The American military presence is not essential, and might even be detrimental, to ensuring access to Persian Gulf oil. ... US policy in the Persian Gulf should not be based on the assumption that the region's energy resources will not make it to market absent the presence of US troops. Oil is the principal source of revenue for the Persian Gulf countries; they could not withhold it from world markets without committing economic suicide." Bush and Blair told us that the occupation would pay for itself and that post-war Iraq would quickly settle into a stable peace. They now want US and British troops to occupy Iraq indefinitely, regardless of costs and risks. But "The military occupation of Iraq is counterproductive to winning the war on terrorism, enormously costly, militarily and economically unnecessary, and politically unsustainable. ... it emboldens anti-American terrorists to expand their operations, both against the forces in their neighbourhood and ultimately on American soil. And the presence of an American military garrison in Iraq weakens the forces of democratic reform by undermining an indigenous government's authority and credibility." "Iraq is many years away from becoming a stable unified democracy, and there is nothing that the United States can do to alter this state of affairs." A democratic Middle East is a `chimera', so "U.S. military withdrawal should not be predicated on the establishment of a democratic government in Iraq." No conditions should be set for withdrawal.

A compelling case for ending the ongoing occupation.

This is the only book I've read of that actually details not only why we should end the military occupation of Iraq, but also how we can get out. The book recommends a complete withdrawal by January 2006, and its recommendations should be taken seriously by our political leaders.

Advocating a military withdrawal by January 31, 2005

Exiting Iraq: Why The U.s. Must End The Military Occupation And Renew The War Against Al Qaeda is the report of a specal task foce under the directorship of Christopher Preble, which was sponsored by the Cato Institute. Observing that the American occupation of Iraq has passed the one-year mark with no end in sight, Exiting Iraq questions the Bush Administration's costly operation, suggesting that America's presence actually encourages a new class of terrorists to rise against the United States, and undermines attempts to bring about political and economic reform. Advocating a military withdrawal by January 31, 2005, Exiting Iraq emphasizes the importance of orchestrating a foreign policy that clearly defines and protects vital American interests overseas without squandering lives or resources.