Trump Must Make Good on Iraq Withdrawal Promise

Troop Withdrawal

By Dr. Ron Paul

Earlier this month, while meeting with the Iraqi prime minister, President Donald Trump reaffirmed his intent to remove all U.S. troops from Iraq. “We were there, and now we’re getting out. We’ll be leaving shortly,” the president told reporters at the time.

Although President Barack Obama should never have sent U.S. troops back into Iraq in 2016, it is definitely well past time to remove them as quickly as possible.

Recently, the administration announced it would be drawing down troops currently in Iraq from 5,200 to 3,500. That’s a good start.

Kingdom Identity

One big roadblock to finally leaving Iraq alone is Trump’s de facto secretary of war, Mike Pompeo. Although he’s supposed to be the top U.S. diplomat, Pompeo is a bull in a china shop. He seems determined to start a war with Iran, China, Russia, Venezuela, and probably a few more countries.

Unfortunately, there is a pattern in this administration where Trump announces the withdrawal of troops from one of the seemingly endless conflicts we are involved in, and an administration official— often Pompeo—“clarifies” the president’s statement to mean the opposite of what the president has just said.

When the president was questioned over the weekend about a timetable for the U.S. withdrawal from Iraq, he turned to Pompeo for an answer. Pompeo’s response did not inspire much hope. “As soon as we can complete the mission,” said Pompeo. What is the mission? Does anyone know? Aside from “regime change” for Iran, that is.

Power of Prophecy, Texe Marrs

At his speech accepting the Republican Party’s nomination for re-election last week, Trump declared, “unlike previous administrations, I have kept America out of new wars—and our troops are coming home.” That sounds good, but how can he achieve that goal if the people he hires to carry out that policy not only disagree with him but seem to be working against him?

The U.S. invasion of Iraq 17 years ago was correctly described at the time by the late NSA Director Bill Odom as “the greatest strategic disaster in American history.” After a relentless barrage of lies about former U.S. ally Saddam Hussein having “weapons of mass destruction,” the U.S. attack and destruction of Iraq did not bring the peace and prosperity promised by the neocon war promoters.

Instead, the U.S. “liberation” of Iraq killed a million Iraqis, most of whom were civilians. It destroyed Iraq’s relatively prosperous economy. It did not result in a more peaceful or stable Middle East. The U.S. had no idea how to remake Iraqi society, and in picking and choosing who could participate in post-invasion Iraq the U.S. helped facilitate the rise of al Qaeda and ISIS. A secular Iraq had been turned into a sectarian incubator for terrorists and extremists. And the biggest winner in the war was Iran, who the U.S. has demonized as an enemy for over four decades.

Before Our Very Eyes cover

Yes, Odom was right. It was a strategic disaster. Turning the U.S. into a global military empire is also a strategic disaster. Trump’s promise to bring troops home from overseas wars sounds very good. But it’s time to see some real action. That might mean some people who disagree with the president need to be fired.

Ron Paul, a former U.S. representative from Texas and medical doctor, continues to write his weekly column for the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity, online at

1 Comment on Trump Must Make Good on Iraq Withdrawal Promise

  1. Absolutely correct Dr. Paul. There is no reason whatsoever that we should be there, we have NO stake in Iraq, but the control of oil monies means the ‘Powers that Be’ want to be there, just like the only reason we are in Afghanistan is to control the worlds heroin.

Comments are closed.