WI: The U.S. Withdrawals from Iraq By 2006

Bush probably isn't quite as hated after the fact. It wouldn't save the Republican Party in 2008, but it'd probably make his legacy a little less trashed. I want to say the US would become more pacifistic in general, but that's a tossup.

Iraq itself is probably pretty screwed either way.
 

Greenville

Banned
I think Bush is even more hated for allowing Iraq to become the situation it does. Sectarian violence, of course, explodes into open civil war between Al-Qaeda or extremist based insurgents trying to create some form of hardened religious state, the Kurds, and what remains of the former Iraqi military after the temporary democratically elected government in Baghdad eventually falls and dissolves into a junta of the last police and army. Genocide occurs in areas lost to extremist insurgents including of Kurds, Christians, and other minorities. Hundreds of thousands are killed in the fighting.

The junta eventually prevails over extremist insurgents, but the country, its economy, infrastructure, and more are in complete shambles for decades. During the Arab Spring, violence may erupt again in a similar civil war to Syria with formal rebels seeking democratic reform, supporters of the junta ruling the state. It's entirely possible extremists may return and resurge like now. Even more people in Iraq are killed with death tolls from all three conflicts going into the millions.
 
Imagine ISIS of 2014 only as an insurgent force and very competently led suddenly not having US troops in their way. Low level sectarian violence in Baghdad will grow and central Iraq will turn to a genocide zone which spreads throughout the region.

Frankly the whole region is screwed utterly, the West is in a boat load of terrorism to make 2015-2017 look like nothing.

This is really a nasty timeline.

No military coup in Iraq is going to save the country nor Syria nor the region here. The Sunni/Shia fault line runs from Baghdad straight though Syria and Lebanon and it was on the precipitous of going up like a Roman Candle in 2006 because of Zarqawi hammering away at it.
 
Last edited:
The current mess in Iraq happens a few years earlier.

In the start of 2006 AQI basically controlled to various degrees almost all the Sunni territory in Iraq. They existed everywhere and nowhere like an effective jihadist insurgency. They had Baghdad on the precipice of melting down into sectarian mass genocide.

After their back was broken as an insurgency and they were forced into the desert its not like they gave up though.

They re-grew as a force in Syria from 2011-2014 and made a very boneheaded move under al-Baghdadi of deciding to invade Iraq conventionally which is high reward, but apps high risk as there is clear battle lines unlike with an insurgency meaning even extremely limited Western military help the Iraqi military reorganized and kicked them out of the major population centers and they aren't coming back at least any time soon.

If you want historical analogies for US politics. AQI blowing up the Golden Domed Shine in early 2006 was America's Tet moment where most of the elites and press decided the war was lost. 2014 was the North Vietnamese Army pouring South in 1974.

The Pentagon convinced the WH to act because they were able to say we can do this on the cheap and advise and lead from behind with air power and we could because it was a conventional war oh and Obama already had a war slush fund created for Iraq and Afghanistan and a sitting AUMF.
 
Last edited:

Greenville

Banned
A group like this probably becomes strong enough to attack the continental United States itself. Bombings, shootings, and practical attacks in major cities. A similar intervention and retaliation may have to happen on an international level at least NATO. They like ISIS probably attack Europe, Russia, and parts of the Middle East as well. A new coalition is needed to stabilize the area. The group is probably closely tied to Al-Qaeda with an alive Bin Laden still.
 
A group like this probably becomes strong enough to attack the continental United States itself. Bombings, shootings, and practical attacks in major cities. A similar intervention and retaliation may have to happen on an international level at least NATO. They like ISIS probably attack Europe, Russia, and parts of the Middle East as well. A new coalition is needed to stabilize the area. The group is probably closely tied to Al-Qaeda with an alive Bin Laden still.

It was already there and we were in a hot war with it called Al-Qaeda in Iraq run by Zarqawi who fought the Soviet's in Afghanistan and had a friendly relationship with Bin Laden, but wouldn't follow his orders unless he felt the same about them.

Zarqawi's main overseas networks were in Western Europe so Europe is going to get it the worst first with the pressure off.

Frankly those years we had a lot more skin in the game in the war, but the enemy forced us to as the militaries 2004-2005 plan of as Iraqi troops step up our troops will continue to step down was a failure because he was killing too many Shia to incite them to kill Sunnis.

This was what al-Baghdadi served under ten years ago and they were just plain smarter at fighting the war and realizing their limits, but their goals were not different. Their tactics were just smarter and much more effective.
 
Last edited:

samcster94

Banned
A group like this probably becomes strong enough to attack the continental United States itself. Bombings, shootings, and practical attacks in major cities. A similar intervention and retaliation may have to happen on an international level at least NATO. They like ISIS probably attack Europe, Russia, and parts of the Middle East as well. A new coalition is needed to stabilize the area. The group is probably closely tied to Al-Qaeda with an alive Bin Laden still.
John Kerry{or a different dem}, as President(likely in TTL for the premise to work) would be needed.
 
Top