The United States should adopt a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq.

The war in general now has become not about who wins or loses. It's become mostly helping the Iraqi government, and establishing a democracy over there. "The War on Terror" is a difficult war to win, but just because it's difficult and possibly impossible, doesn't mean we're not helping the cause, even if we're not completely destroying the problem, we can still be making positive progress. 1A- Threat of Saddam Hussein>>The threat of Saddam Hussein is gone, but he has still left a mess in Iraq. As mess that the United States is trying to help clean up. WMD>> These were just listed reasons of why we went into Iraq in the 1st place, not why were still there, although some of them are why we went in AND why we're still there. Terrorism>> Just because terrorism will always exist doesn't mean that our efforts are pointless, especially if we're helping at least a little. We are making progress to stop some terrorists, and that seems worth it. Taking into consideration that all it takes is one terrorist to take a lot of lives. Human Right Abuses>> We're not going to just randomly pull out one day. We're going to gradually reduce the amount of troops we have stationed. If we set a date and then just take out all of our troops, that would be incredibly overwhelming to the Iraqi leaders, and in the end being trouble to the United States because we would have wasted our money to have them go back to similar ways that they were before. Iraq's Oil>> How can it be proven that if we pulled out that oil prices would go down? Also, my stance in this debate is not necessarily that we should stay in Iraq forever, just that a time table is NOT going to help in the process of getting out because there are things we need to tend to. So this is not an advantage to Pro To spread democracy>> The United States has not been telling Iraq what to do, we've been working with them to compromise. They agreed to work with us, how horrible would it be of the U.S. to start helping them with this, let them make progress, then tell them - "Oh by the way, were leaving on this day, so figure it out yourself!" UN resolution violations, Preemption, and intelligence>> again, these is just a reason why we went into Iraq in the first place, even if our mission in these areas has already been accomplished. Also, with intelligence, we always have more to learn. ---I would also like to point out that while Pro claimed before that we shouldn't be over there because we're being seen as the police of the world- which we have always been, he does not answer why that's so significant now. Our Commitments to Iraq>>> I'll answer this with another quote from Bush: "We have made clear commitments before the world, and America will keep those commitments. First, we will take every necessary measure to assure the safety of American and coalition personnel, and the security of Iraqi citizens. We're on the offensive against the killers and terrorists in that country, and we will stay on the offensive. In and around Fallujah, U.S. Marines are maintaining pressure on Saddam loyalists and foreign fighters and other militants. We're keeping that pressure on to ensure that Fallujah ceases to be an enemy sanctuary. In northern sectors of the city, elements of the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force are prepared to strike at terrorist fighters and prevent a resurgence of violence and chaos. South of the city, the Marines are disrupting enemy attacks on our supply routes and routing out anti-coalition fighters... We're helping to build Iraqi forces that can take responsibility for security. And our forces are also helping to ensure the delivery of humanitarian supplies to families that suffer as a result of the chaos in certain communities created by the terrorists and those who want to halt the advance of freedom." B. My point was never that just because we've always been in debt we should stay there. It was only that we know how to deal with it and that our economy is still one of the best in the world. IIA. By not having a time table we allow the Iraqi government to progress at there own pace instead of overwhelming and pressuring them. To be successful in this mission they need to be able to take this difficult change at there own pace, and not have the Untied States trying to make them move faster than they can because we want out by a certain date. If we set a time table, our mission will not be accomplished because we'll be more focused on getting out of Iraq rather than completing the purpose that we were there for in the first place. B. We are going to have to get out of Iraq, but NOT before they're ready. They need to be able to go at there own pace, then we can gradually reduce our number of troops-- Pro said before, that by setting a time table it will have the Iraqi Leaders realize that they have to take over soon, but gradually reducing the number of troops when they're getting closer to where they need to be does the same thing!! -but in a BETTER way. It sends the same message that Pro claims is sent by a timetable…but they still have our help, we need to ease them off our help to be successful, and that cant happen with a timetable. C2-->Making Iraq itself again?? Isn't this what we're trying to get away from because of all the problems they were having before? C-general--> Our mission can not be accomplished through a time table, the only mission that can be accomplished through a timetable is getting out of Iraq... that's it. A timetable would not be there to help the REAL reasons we went over to Iraq…it would only for the people who want to get out, because that's the only mission that can be accomplished by a time table. Again, the quote from president Bush to conclude: "Setting a deadline for withdrawal is setting a date for failure