Withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan and Iraq


There has been talk about bringing back American troops from Iraq and Afghanistan ever since they were deployed in these countries to restore and maintain law and order. For years now the question about bringing back our troops has been the hit of discussion by the congress with part of it opposing the withdrawal of troops from these countries by giving concrete evidence of insecurity and political instability, while the other part of the same congress claiming that it is unfair to leave American citizens without enough protection and security yet they pay their taxes to enjoy such services which the government deprives them and gives it to other countries.

The Argument

I have to agree that both sides are right in their arguments which are convincingly genuine and reliable to work with before making a decision of what is to be done. When you look on the opposing side of this argument you tend to see that we as the American people are not the only ones who deserve security, but also there are other people out there who are in much need of the same security than we do at the moment. In fact, we as the world superpower have a responsibility of not only upholding law and order within our borders, but in the whole world. This is because most nations look upon us for guidance and help, it is not right to shun our shoulders and look at the situation with cold shoulders. This is the mind and heart of the opposing side for the withdrawal of Troops from Afghanistan and Iraq. To name just a few incidences about why troops should still stay and keep watch is a recent event which occurred where the new militia group called the ISIS killed innocent men, women and children in cold blood. There are scenarios where there are a lot of kidnappings going on in Algeria; this has made the US government to coordinate with that of Algeria to share technology, manpower and finances to tackle the situation. This tends to bring down the levels of insecurity because as the saying goes, “your neighbors house fire might spread to yours if you do not help to contain it while you still can”.

On the other hand when you look at the antagonist’s argument towards this topic they tend to show a lot of concrete argue-mental logic on their part. Most of the arguments brought forth are selfish, but tend to bring out absolute sense. For example, the American citizens deserve their protection from the law service providers like the technology of homeland securities, skills and workforce of the FBI, CIA, Police, and the big boot from their military to boost in some situations that require immediate attention.

One of such scenarios that require immediate attention are natural disasters which tend to affect this beautiful country unexpectedly. For example, the Hurricane Sandy also known as Super storm Sandy was the deadliest Hurricane to have ever hit the USA in 2012, many Citizens lost their lives and property due to lack of enough expert man power and total concentration of resources such as technological advancements to cub the situation. The argument of the antagonists is that if the US government had ensured that the soldier in Iraq and Afghan and Iraq were here in their homeland at that time there would have been a lot of saving strategies and resources to help cub the situation. This is because the troops in these countries know more about survival skills in such environment and their skills would have played a major role in saving lives. Also, there are a lot of technology machines which are able to detect and identify situations, most of these machines are used by these troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, If only these machines were used by them in their own motherland then there would be a lot of saved lives today. This would also apply to the wild fires that tend to happen almost in day to day events.


To conclude I have to say both sides have the perfect argumentative plan; however we have also to measure the stronger view point and concentrates on it mostly. Such a situation requires keen thoughts and discussions before any action can be taken. This is due to the weight that is being carried by either choice.



American Reply to Request of De Facto Government for the Withdrawal of American Troops. , 1916. Print.

Dudley, William. How Should the U.s. Proceed in Iraq?Detroit, MI: Greenhaven Press, 2008. Print.

McGovern, George S, and William R. Polk. Out of Iraq: A Practical Plan for Withdrawal Now. New York: Simon & Schuster Paperbacks, 2006. Print.

"Are you looking for this answer? We can Help click Order Now"