US military armored vehicles convoy preparing for withdrawal from Iraq base.US Withdraws From Iraq Again—Victory Over ISIS or Win for Iran?
Left says
- •The withdrawal completes a phased drawdown negotiated under the Biden administration, reflecting years of diplomatic planning rather than an abrupt decision
- •Ending the deployment closes a costly chapter marked by more than 4,500 American deaths and extensive Iraqi civilian casualties over 23 years
- •Iran-backed militias are celebrating the pullout as a 'crushing defeat for the American project,' raising concern that a U.S. exit cedes influence to Tehran without a clear plan to counter it
- •Kurdish residents near former U.S. bases express fear of renewed attacks from Iran-backed groups or an ISIS resurgence, suggesting the transition carries real security risks for vulnerable populations
Right says
- •Trump frames the entire 23-year Iraq engagement as the product of 'very bad decision-making' by prior administrations, casting the withdrawal as correcting a historic mistake
- •The exit is presented as a clear victory, both over ISIS, which Trump says has been 'completely decimated,' and as a win for both the U.S. and Iraq
- •Trump highlights his endorsement of Iraq's new prime minister, Ali al-Zaidi, as validation of a positive new direction for U.S.-Iraq relations
- •Ending the deployment fulfills a long-standing goal of withdrawing from prolonged Middle East military commitments that drained American resources
Common Take
High Consensus- The withdrawal, completed September 30, 2025, marks the second time U.S. forces have fully left Iraq, after the 2011 pullout and 2014 return to fight ISIS
- CENTCOM confirms the departure was 'orderly' and transitions the mission to a bilateral U.S.-Iraq security relationship rather than ending cooperation entirely
- The drawdown plan originated from a 2024 agreement under the Biden administration and was carried out on schedule by the Trump administration
- Both sides recognize the war's toll, including thousands of American deaths and a long, difficult military and political history in Iraq
The Arguments
Right argues
The withdrawal marks a legitimate victory over ISIS, which has been militarily defeated as an organized force, and allows the U.S. to end a costly 23-year entanglement that drained resources and lives with limited strategic payoff.
Left counters
Declaring 'victory' glosses over the fact that Iran-backed militias are celebrating the pullout as their own triumph, suggesting the power vacuum may simply be filled by a hostile actor rather than a stable, friendly Iraqi state.
Left argues
The orderly, phased nature of the withdrawal—negotiated years in advance under the Biden administration—reflects careful diplomatic planning rather than a reactive or politically motivated exit, and deserves credit as responsible statecraft.
Right counters
Regardless of who negotiated the timeline, Trump is the president who oversaw its completion and can rightly claim credit for finally ending a 'quagmire' that previous administrations allowed to drag on for over a decade without a firm end date.
Left argues
Kurdish residents near former U.S. bases fear renewed attacks from Iran-backed groups or an ISIS resurgence, indicating that declaring the mission complete may leave vulnerable populations exposed to real security risks.
Right counters
The shift to a 'bilateral defense relationship' with a now-sovereign, democratically elected Iraqi government—led by a prime minister Trump explicitly endorsed—is designed precisely to ensure Iraq can handle its own security without permanent U.S. occupation.
Right argues
Trump's framing of the original 2003 invasion as 'very bad decision-making' reflects a broader, popular conclusion that the war was a strategic blunder, and ending the occupation finally allows the U.S. to redirect resources away from open-ended Middle East commitments.
Left counters
Simply exiting without a clear strategy to counter Iranian influence doesn't resolve the underlying strategic failure—it risks trading one bad outcome (prolonged occupation) for another (ceding the country to Tehran's orbit), which hardly vindicates the decision as a 'win.'
Left argues
The human cost of the engagement—over 4,500 American deaths and extensive Iraqi civilian casualties—means the withdrawal should be viewed soberly as the closing of a tragic chapter rather than triumphantly as a clean victory lap.
Right counters
Acknowledging the war's costs doesn't preclude celebrating its end; recognizing that American forces finally achieved their core objective of decimating ISIS allows the public to both mourn losses and credit the mission's eventual success.
Challenge Questions
These questions target genuine internal contradictions — meant to provoke honest reflection.
Right asks Left
“If the withdrawal was planned years in advance under a bipartisan, diplomatically negotiated timeline, why should concerns about ceding ground to Iran be treated as a current failure rather than a foreseeable risk that was presumably weighed and accepted when the deal was struck?”
Left asks Right
“If the war was truly 'very bad decision-making' from the start, how does framing the withdrawal as a clean 'victory' over ISIS and for Iraq square with the fact that the same decision-making chain—including this administration's continuation of the Biden-negotiated plan—shaped the very outcome now being celebrated?”
Outlier Report
Left Fringe
Anti-war progressives like Rep. Ilhan Omar and commentators at The Intercept who view any continued U.S. military presence or influence-seeking in Iraq as imperialist overreach, likely around 15-20% of the left, pushing harder against any framing that laments 'losing influence' to Iran.
Right Fringe
Neoconservative hawks like Liz Cheney and commentators at The Dispatch or National Review who view the withdrawal as a dangerous retreat enabling Iranian expansion, representing maybe 10-15% of the right, diverging from Trump's triumphant framing.
Noise Assessment
High performative noise from foreign policy pundits and partisan social media accounts; actual public engagement with Iraq policy specifics is low compared to domestic issues, meaning most Americans form loose impressions rather than strong opinions.
Sources (5)
<p>The United States military has finally withdrawn from Iraq after 12 years, with President Donald Trump criticizing the "very bad decision-making that got us involved in this quagmire in the first place."</p> <p>The post <a href="https://www.breitbart.com/middle-east/2026/09/30/u-s-military-withdraws-from-iraq-after-12-years-trump-calls-out-very-bad-decision-making-that-got-us-involved-in-the-first-place/" rel="nofollow">U.S. Military Withdraws from Iraq After 12 Years, Trump Calls Out ‘Very Bad Decision-Making That Got Us Involved’ in the First Place</a> appeared first on <a href="https://www.breitbart.com" rel="nofollow">Breitbart</a>.</p>
It's the second time the U.S. has withdrawn all military forces from Iraq.
U.S. forces formally withdrew from Iraq today, marking the end of a long and turbulent military presence. The withdrawal brought celebrations in the capital -- but also concern about what comes next. For insight and analysis, Geoff Bennett spoke with James Jeffrey and Feisal Istrabadi. Jeffrey was ambassador to Iraq under President Obama, and Istrabadi served as Iraq's ambassador to the UN.
President Trump touted the final withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq as a win for both countries more than 20 years after the start of the Iraq War. “It’s a victory for the United States, it’s a victory for Iraq and a decisive victory over ISIS, which has been completely decimated,” Trump said speaking at…
This story appeared in Today, Explained, a daily newsletter that helps you understand the most compelling news and stories of the day. Subscribe here. The last US troops in Iraq formally withdrew today, 23 years after the United States first invaded Iraq and 12 years after it returned to take on the Islamic State. It’s a historic occasion, […]