I am not even necessarily disagreeing with it (I lean very anti-Iran and slightly geopolitically neoconservative) but the tone is not at all neutral and makes no mention of the possible downsides of troops staying in Iraq after decades.
Perhaps the US are trying not even to acknowledge it. A reputable newspaper would normally include "the Department of War was contacted for comment" but maybe that's not appropriate for Reuters.
For instance:
> US forces leave country where 4,500 of them died in worst US war of 21st century
I am not even certain that this war was worse than the Afghanistan war. Perhaps the Iraq war was objectively worse, but since the sudden withdrawal in Afghanistan, leaving the Taliban in charge, I am not so sure which war was worse. I am not even sure how to qualify it, so Reuters stating this was the worst war is ... indeed a strange label to use. Wasn't Reuters indeed more objective in the past? And with that I mean objective at all times, not white-washing or black-washing.
I now finished reading the article and it indeed seems op-ed. The reader now thinks that the war against Iran must continue. I still fail to understand why the USA invaded the area. Other than some making enormous profits, of course. If 911 was used as a rationale, why was not Saudi Arabia attacked?
Iraq was 4500 dead for one Texan trying to imitate daddy while listening to his CEO buddies.
Now, there are certainly other axis along which you can judge a war.
> I am not even certain that this war was worse than the Afghanistan war
The Iraq war from 2003-2011 (8-9 yr) had twice as many US troop deaths (4430) as the Afghanistan war (~20 yr)(2450) in double the amount of time.
We have too many labels. That’s not good for a species which hates others based on different labels.
Edit: I should’ve expressed that this was a general thought triggered by the comment but it’s not a direct criticism of the person making it.
"Slightly geopolitically neoconservative" is the short way to describe that.
Thank you for taking the time to clarify your position.
Maybe each citizen of the world can have a vote. To make it fair, 1 US dollar of assets is one vote!
Hopefully we get a 2029 president who completely alters the alliance with Israel and makes further close association contingent on many serious changes in how they handle Gaza, the West Bank, and prosecution of terrorists and war criminals.
US leadership openly and proudly praises authoritarians and dictators around the world. What are you on about in here.
It reports on some reactions.