US Ends Iraq Mission After 23 Years, Leaving Power Vacuum for Iran
Left says
- •The withdrawal closes a costly chapter that began with a war launched on faulty premises in 2003, and reflects long-standing skepticism about the wisdom of the original invasion and its human toll.
- •Iraqi sovereignty and self-determination are legitimate goals, and many Iraqis are celebrating an end to foreign military occupation after two decades of bloodshed.
- •Concerns about a security vacuum should not obscure the deeper question of whether prolonged U.S. military presence ever produced lasting stability rather than fueling cycles of violence.
- •Attention should focus on supporting Iraq through diplomatic and economic means going forward, rather than assuming military presence is the only path to regional stability.
Right says
- •The withdrawal risks creating a security vacuum that emboldens Iran-backed militias and could allow ISIS remnants to regroup, undermining hard-won gains against terrorism.
- •Thousands of American lives and trillions of dollars were invested in Iraq, and the strategic benefits of that sacrifice should not be squandered through a hasty or poorly timed exit.
- •Iran's growing influence in the region is a direct consequence of reduced U.S. presence, weakening America's ability to counter Tehran's ambitions.
- •Iraqi forces and Kurdish Peshmerga may not yet be fully equipped to independently manage ongoing threats from ISIS remnants without coalition support.
Common Take
High Consensus- The withdrawal was formalized through a 2023 agreement between the U.S. and Iraqi governments, not a unilateral or sudden decision.
- Operation Inherent Resolve succeeded in defeating ISIS's territorial caliphate and organized military threat in Iraq.
- Iraq's future stability depends on its own security forces' capacity to manage remaining threats from ISIS remnants and Iran-aligned militias.
- The 2003 invasion and subsequent conflict caused immense human and financial costs for both Iraqi civilians and American service members.
The Arguments
Left argues
The 2003 invasion was launched on faulty premises and led to hundreds of thousands of Iraqi deaths and thousands of American casualties, so ending the military presence honors Iraqi sovereignty and self-determination rather than perpetuating an occupation that never delivered lasting stability.
Right counters
Whatever the flaws of the original 2003 invasion, the 2014 anti-ISIS mission was a distinct, more narrowly justified effort that successfully dismantled the Islamic State's territorial caliphate, and withdrawing now risks squandering those specific, hard-won gains.
Right argues
Iraqi Security Forces and the Kurdish Peshmerga may lack the advanced weapons, air defense, and technology needed to independently contain ISIS remnants and Iran-backed militias, meaning the withdrawal could open a security vacuum just as regional tensions from the U.S.-Iran conflict are rising.
Left counters
The withdrawal was negotiated two years in advance specifically to allow time for a transition to Iraqi-led security backed by a bilateral relationship, and continued U.S. military occupation was never a sustainable or welcomed long-term solution by the Iraqi government or public.
Right argues
Iran's growing regional influence is a direct consequence of reduced U.S. presence, and stepping back from Iraq weakens America's strategic ability to counter Tehran's ambitions at a moment when Iran-backed proxies are already emboldened.
Left counters
Two decades of U.S. military presence did not prevent Iran's influence from growing in Iraq in the first place, suggesting that troop levels were never the decisive variable and that diplomatic and economic engagement may be more effective tools going forward.
Left argues
Many Iraqis are celebrating 'Sovereignty Day' as a genuine milestone after enduring two decades of foreign military presence, and their desire for normalcy and self-governance deserves to be centered rather than treated as secondary to American strategic calculations.
Right counters
Celebration of sovereignty does not eliminate the practical reality that Iraqi and Kurdish officials themselves have warned ISIS could exploit new security gaps, meaning premature optimism about self-sufficiency could cost Iraqi lives if the transition falters.
Right argues
Thousands of American lives and trillions of dollars were invested in Iraq, and a hasty or poorly timed exit risks squandering that sacrifice if the security situation deteriorates shortly after troops depart.
Left counters
Continuing to justify military presence by citing past sacrifice risks perpetuating indefinite occupation with no clear endpoint, and the sunk cost of past investment is not a sound basis for open-ended future commitments.
Challenge Questions
These questions target genuine internal contradictions — meant to provoke honest reflection.
Right asks Left
“If the left believes prolonged U.S. presence fueled cycles of violence rather than stability, how does it explain the specific gains against ISIS that the 2014-2025 coalition mission achieved, and what alternative would have secured those gains without any military footprint?”
Left asks Right
“If trillions of dollars and years of training were meant to make Iraqi forces self-sufficient, what does it say about the mission's success that withdrawal now is framed as risking a security collapse rather than validating readiness?”
Outlier Report
Left Fringe
Anti-war activists and figures like Code Pink's Medea Benjamin argue the entire 23-year presence was an imperialist project and celebrate withdrawal unreservedly, dismissing security vacuum concerns entirely; this represents a small vocal segment, roughly 10-15% of the left.
Right Fringe
Hawkish commentators like Sen. Lindsey Graham and some Fox News figures argue the withdrawal is a dangerous retreat that will be remembered like the 2011 pullout that enabled ISIS's rise, pushing for indefinite troop presence; this represents roughly 15-20% of the right, with more populist/America First voices (aligned with Trump's own framing of the withdrawal as a 'victory') taking a less alarmist view.
Noise Assessment
Moderate noise: cable news and foreign policy pundits amplify both the 'quagmire ended' and 'security vacuum' framings more than the general public engages with this story, which ranks low in day-to-day public attention compared to domestic economic issues.
Sources (12)
The US military has completed the withdrawal of American forces and equipment from Erbil Air Base in Iraq, ending its Operation Inherent Resolve mission, US Central Command announced Wednesday. The departure closes the Iraq chapter of the U.S.-led military mission launched against ISIS in 2014, while shifting primary responsibility for the country's security to Iraqi forces. The broader counter-ISIS campaign is not ending, however, with the U.S.-led task force relocating its headquarters to Jordan and operations continuing in Syria.
U.S. military forces are set to depart from bases in Iraq on Wednesday following two decades of American involvement that resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians and thousands of U.S. troops, and now leaves a battered but increasingly influential Iran at the center of the region's future.
US forces ended their mission in Iraq on Wednesday after more than two decades of war there, raising fears of a security vacuum that would embolden Iranian-backed Shi'ite militias and allow Islamic State to regroup.
The withdrawal of coalition forces, under a deal agreed two years ago, was a key demand of the Iraqi government.
The U.S. military finished withdrawing from Iraq, 23 years after its 2003 invasion and 12 years after ramping up efforts against ISIS with Operation Inherent Resolve. CBS News' Ramy Inocencio reports.
The Pentagon says U.S. forces and equipment in Iraq have been withdrawn, declaring ISIS defeated "as an organized military threat in Iraq and across the region."
‘4,418 U.S. military deaths’
Iraqi Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi, who presided over the handover ceremony, said the withdrawal was the beginning of a "new phase" for a sovereign Iraq.
Some Iraqis are celebrating the end of an American military presence that unleashed waves of bloodshed. Others fear what happens next for their country, trapped between Washington and Tehran.
The Americans did not understand the country when they invaded in 2003. Over a correspondent’s many trips there, it was not clear that this ever changed much.
Plus, the nepo babies take Fat Bear Week.
The U.S. has withdrawn its final troops from Iraq, leaving its defense future uncertain. And, the Supreme Court has sided for now with the Trump administration on third-country deportations.