Rand Paul: “coming home makes sense; staying does not. Supporters of the war in Iraq, as well as some nonsupporters, warn of the…”

“coming home makes sense; staying does not. Supporters of the war in Iraq, as well as some nonsupporters, warn of the dangers if we leave. But is it not quite possible that these dangers are simply a consequence of having gone into Iraq in the first place, rather than a consequence of leaving? {time} 1545 Isn't it possible that staying only makes the situation worse? If chaos results after our departure, it is because we occupied Iraq, not because we left. The original reasons for our preemptive strike are long forgotten, having been based on false assumptions. The justification given now is that we must persist in this war or else dishonor those who already have died or been wounded. We are also told civil strife likely will engulf all of Iraq. But what is the logic of perpetuating a flawed policy where more Americans die just because others have suffered? More American deaths cannot possibly help those who have already been injured or killed. Civil strive, if not civil war, already exists in Iraq. And despite the infighting, all factions oppose our occupation. The insistence on using our military to occupy and run Iraq provides convincing evidence to our detractors inside and outside of Iraq that we have no intention of leaving. Building permanent military bases and a huge embassy confirms these fears. We deny the importance of oil and Israel's influence on our policy, yet we fail to convince the Arab/Muslim world that our intentions are purely humanitarian.…”