The previous argument is irrational. If the terrorists wanted to simply sit and wait for us to leave why don't they stop now for a few months, then we would leave and they could begin their attacks again? I don't think it makes any sense to keep troops in Iraq indefinitely because it would 'help the enemy'. It's just the opposite.
Staying in Iraq indefinitely is exactly what Osama Bin Laden wants. It has given him a staging, recruiting, and training ground for his global terror network. If America were to form an exit strategy, it would take the wind out of the sails of the nationalistic insurgents, and it would be a huge blow to Al-Qaeda. America gains nothing by keeping 150,000 troops in Iraq to be targets for terrorists; Al-Qaeda, on the other hand, benefits enormously. They can use the war as a propaganda tool, as a training ground to train the next generation of tens of thousands of terrorists, and to drain the American military and resources. Tell me, is this really a smart strategy? Is it really a good strategy to fight a guerrilla war in the heart of the Middle East with no exit strategy when it is breaking our military, playing into the hands of the enemy, and destabilizing the region? I don't think so.
I think we need a flexible exit strategy with a timeline to redeploy our troops out of Iraq. Some of those troops should be diverted to Afghanistan, where the Taliban is staging increasingly larger attacks.
Finally, let us remember that there were no terrorists in Iraq before Bush invaded. On a CIA document after 9-11, the CIA released names of countries where it believed Al-Qaeda was operating. Guess which country wasn't on the list? Iraq. Think about the logic of what Bush has done: he's taken a part of the world that had no terrorists, and he has made it into the largest terrorist recruitment and training ground in the world. Does this make any sense from a strategic point of view? It may sound macho when Bush talks about how were 'killin terrorists in Iraq', but macho talk is no substitute for a coherent strategy. We need to focus our war on terror on the barbarians who killed 3,000 Americans on 9-11 and stop this unnecessary and counterproductive diversion.

Giving your strategy to the enemy is, I believe, not a very nice thing to do. Saying when we would withdraw is simply telling the enemy to stay low and wait. We made the mess in Iraq and we cannot leave until we have put them back on their feet.

Remember kids- THE TERRORISTS WERE NOT FROM IRAQ. . .no matter what country-western-song lyrics suggest, they came from Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia. I guess not enough poor people (on all sides) have died for this administration to acknowledge (1) its mistakes and (2) an exit strategy. Not to worry- when enough American families figure out that this war is bullsh#t they will start to demand (not ask) for a date of withdrawl.

This idea is so stupid it is beyond words. Why would you give the terrorists, and I would not even dignify them with the word insurgent, a time table to get ready its totally assanine. If we say we are going to pull out and six months everything will calm down and then all hell will break loose and we will have to go back in. People need to face facts we are going to have a military force in Iraq for a long time. Look how long we have had bases in Europe and the cold was has been over how long never mind WWII.

Fixing a time would be a total disaster- it becomes the day of victory for your enemy. You'd think we'd have learned more from Vietnam about cluching defeat from the jaws of victory. Wars are tough, ugly, brutal things. But allowing the deaths of our braves soldiers to account for nothing because we simply lack the political will and the emotional stamina necessary to follow our mission through is not only stupid but tragic. Our mission was to (i) depose Saddam Hussein, removing the possiblity he may have or in the future possess, or trade in weapons of mass destruction (ii) defeat the republican guard and prop up a new democratically elected government (iii) ensure Iraqi security forces are well equipped and trained to enable them to secure their own nation and protect their newly formed democraticly elected regime that would subsequently prove to cause a ripple effect through the Middle East. We've deposed Saddam Hussein, our Armed Forces crushed the Republican guard. We are ahead of schedule with training the new Iraq forces. They've in less that 2 short years created a newly formed democratically elected assembly. Yes, we are dealing with a vicious foreign trained and funded insurgency. But after all that we've accomplished- the elections, the building of thousands of schools, hospitals, roads, water irrigation systems... we're suppose to back out now? Back out now and allow the terrorists to win? Absolutely nothing could be more foolish. The time for discussing the War was in the past not now. NOW we should fulfill our objective whether that takes 2 more years or 10.

Unfortunately you cant put a timetable out for a withdrawal from Iraq. We're there until Iraq establishes a stable government and the Insurgency is reduced to a manageable resistance that Iraq alone can handle. That day is a long way off and trying to force a withdrawal before this happens is foolish. The best we can do here is complete the job at hand. Look at the other countries we have a military presecene in : South Korea, Germany, Panama, the Phillipines, etc, etc.....We're in Iraq for the long haul. We may end up reducing the number of forces we have in Iraq, but we'll be in Iraq ( and Afghanistan if you havent forgetten) for a LONG time.

We have to get out sometime. We aren't doing anything, we aren't fighting a war on terror. We will be out of Iraq absolutely no later than 2009 when we get somebody else as president. Because with the sharp decline in approval of the war, lol, by then, he will likely be the only person on Earth who thinks we should still be there. And I have to say sfalconer, you need some literary skills, are you sure you aren't dislexic? I have to wonder if you ever passed 3rd grade English. We all have bad typing days, but man, try to read that post without having to look back over it at least ten tiimes, you can't.

There needs to be some timetable. Unfortunately Bush has made it clear that there will be no such thing. Well see in a little over three years. In the meantime, keep counting bodies. In fact, all you bush supporters: sign up! They need more people and if you really believe in this BS, get in there.bring it on!

I think this will happen, but I agree that it isn't good to fix a time table.

Iraq already is suffering a horrendous bloodbath.

This would really be great. The only problem with setting a time schedule like this is that the terrorists will probably catch wind of it and wait until we withdraw to initiate a coup, resulting in a horrendous bloodbath and the installation of a military junta (or maybe even a dictator) which would likely be more repressive than Saddam Hussein.