Iraq in Crisis- Merged Superthread

[tomahawk6]

All Obama wanted to do as in Afghanistan was to get out and claim victory.

 

[Rifleman62]

Hey T6, to end a war and claim victory all you need is a pen and a phone.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Stop all immigration out of the area to religiously and culturally civilized nations. Put the Saudis on notice that we're not going to do their dirty work anymore and they can start fighting their own battles. Scale back the oil imports from OPEC until their ports are clogged with tankers full of oil they can't move. Arm all sides with all the AKs and ammo that can be found on the open market. Sit back and wait til there's a victor. Fly surveillance drones full time to keep in the know along with intercepted radio, satellite, etc. Once we determine who won, we can decide if they're trustworthy enough to negotiate with or whether they're still ignorant savages that need to remain totally isolated. Yes, there'll be some belt tightening around the world when we shut their taps off, but I'd rather that than have them export their religious nonsense here where it will have real impact on our grandchildren. We need to say we're not all inclusive and no, you can't come in. Come back in 35 years after you've had an attitude adjustment, then maybe we'll talk.

 

[Transporter]

All Obama wanted to do as in Afghanistan was to get out and claim victory.

Had Obama recommitted US Forces to stay in Iraq without a Status of Forces Agreement, the GOP would have had a field day with that one, not to mention it would have been a grave mistake. What did you want him to do?

If Obama cured cancer tomorrow, you'd be pissed that he put Oncologists out of work, thus hurting the economy or something.

 

[Transporter]

Hey T6, to end a war and claim victory all you need is a pen and a phone.

Educate yourself on the “President’s Surveillance Program”. 

 

[muskrat89]

If Obama cured cancer tomorrow, you'd be pissed that he put Oncologists out of work, thus hurting the economy or something.

Oh - and you're not displaying any bias whatsoever...

All - debate the topic, leave the personal digs out of it.

Army.ca Staff

 

[Transporter]

Oh - and you're not displaying any bias whatsoever...

All - debate the topic, leave the personal digs out of it.

Army.ca Staff

I have no bias... frankly I couldn't care less. The Obama blamers are laughable to me though and I sometimes find it difficult to stop myself from calling them out on sh**. That said, I'm done.

 

[Brad Sallows]

>As a result, the seeds of a three way civil war between the Sunnis, Shia and Kurds were sown and the inevitable breakup of the country is now coming to pass.

Those seeds were sown with the Sykes-Picot borders.  A three-way civil war in Iraq was inevitable; Saddam Hussein was not immortal.  I suspect the counterfactual in which Hussein perished of old age or assassination would have been uglier than the breakup of Yugoslavia.  The US overthrow triggered the civil war prematurely and put the US in situ to throttle the ferocity of the war (and lose blood and treasure doing so).  I don't think US soldiers should have been put in harm's way to achieve that, but it was achieved.  Along the way, the Kurds got a fighting chance to establish their own state instead of being overrun and extinguished.  Iraq stopped being a direct threat to Israel.  Gaddhafi in Libya rethought his belligerence.  Etc.

The biggest mistake was failure to divide Iraq in three.  The second biggest mistake was to throw everything away to spite the Bush administration.  People are fond of making comparisons with Vietnam.  They are not entirely wrong.  In both cases, something was won (irrespective of whether it was worth the cost), and then thrown away out of pure political small-mindedness.  If you really don't want to negotiate a SOFA, don't be surprised when you fail to negotiate a SOFA.

The chief lesson is this: conservatives should be resolute non-interventionists, because progressives have short attention spans (the fate of all R2P) or will throw away whatever gains are made.  There is no point sending soldiers to die for nothing, and ultimately "nothing" is what has been attained in Iraq and Afghanistan.  There is no need to repeat the performance; neo-cons and R2P advocates (note they inhabit both sides of the political centre), please do not miss any future opportunities to STFU and stay home.

 

[a_majoor]

Given the devolution ito a 3 way struggle, a "30 year war" is perhaps the "best" possible outcome. Given the fact that there is virtually no overlap between the political, ethnic and religious "borders" and groupings in the region, only the regions with defendable geographical "bastions" will eventually remain as nation states (Turkey and Iran are bordered by mountains, deserts and seas which have allowed them to remain distinct entities for thousands of years, and Egypt is similarly sheltered from the east and west). Israel, being a free market and liberal democracy, will be able to fight on for a long time to come due to efficient use of all her resources, but much like ancient Athens, will eventually be overwhelmed and lost to the West.

While I am for a containment strategy as well, it needs to be far more total than most people assume; we need to ensure there is no electronic communications in or out of the region either. We don't need the various sides calling for allies or action in the East or West, or heart rending pictures of atrocities being staged to bring the R2P crowd into action. Coming to the aid of the Bosnian Muslims, while arguably the right thing to do from a moral standpoint gained us nothing at all. Why waste blood and treasure without even getting a "thank you" in return.

There are some regions which do demand the attention of the West (or the East). Maintaining the SLOCs through the Indian Ocean should be a great concern for our Anglosphere allies in India and Australia (as well as the honorary members like Japan), and Afghanistan merits attention as the "land bridge" allowing trade to flow East-West (the ancient Silk Road) and North-South (connecting India to central Asia), and keeping the civilized Islamic nations (ones without major infusions of Arabic or Persian cultural influences) in the fold should be a major concern of diplomats and free traders around the world as well.

To paraphrase the ancient Chinese curse; we will live in interesting times.

And as an added bonus for the historically illiterate, in 2011 the current administration was claiming credit for the situation in Iraq. because they had set the conditions in 2011, they DO NOT get to blame the current situation on anyone but themselves:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/marc-thiessen-obamas-iraq-disaster/2014/06/16/7151391e-f55b-11e3-a3a5-42be35962a52_story.html

Obama’s Iraq disaster
   
MARC A. THIESSEN
June 16

In 2011, the situation in Iraq was so good that the Obama administration was actually trying to take credit for it, with Vice President Joe Biden declaring that Iraq “could be one of the great achievements of this administration.”

Now in 2014, as Iraq descends into chaos, Democrats are trying to blame the fiasco on — you guessed it — George W. Bush. “I don’t think this is our responsibility,” said House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, declaring that the unfolding disaster in Iraq “represents the failed policies that took us down this path 10 years ago.”

Sorry, but this is a mess of President Obama’s making.

When Obama took office he inherited a pacified Iraq, where the terrorists had been defeated both militarily and ideologically.

Militarily, thanks to Bush’s surge, coupled with the Sunni Awakening, al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI, now the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, or ISIS) was driven from the strongholds it had established in Anbar and other Iraqi provinces. It controlled no major territory, and its top leader — Abu Musab al-Zarqawi — had been killed by U.S. Special Operations forces.

Ideologically, the terrorists had suffered a popular rejection. Iraq was supposed to be a place where al-Qaeda rallied the Sunni masses to drive America out, but instead, the Sunnis joined with Americans to drive al-Qaeda out — a massive ideological defeat.

Obama took that inheritance and squandered it, with two catastrophic mistakes:

First, he withdrew all U.S. forces from Iraq — allowing the defeated terrorists to regroup and reconstitute themselves.

Second, he failed to support the moderate, pro-Western opposition in neighboring Syria — creating room for ISIS to fill the security vacuum. ISIS took over large swaths of Syrian territory, established a safe haven, used it to recruit and train thousands of jihadists, and prepared their current offensive in Iraq.

The result: When Obama took office, the terrorists had been driven from their safe havens; now they are on threatening to take control of a nation. Iraq is on the cusp of turning into what Afghanistan was in the 1990s — a safe haven from which to plan attacks on America and its allies.

It did not have to be this way. In 2011, the U.S. commander in Iraq, Gen. Lloyd J. Austin III, recommended keeping between 14,000 and 18,000 troops in Iraq (down from 45,000). The White House rejected Austin’s recommendation, worried about “the cost and the political optics.” So our commanders reduced their request to 10,000 — a number commanders said might be able to work “in extremis.” But the White House rejected this as well, insisting the number be cut to between 3,000 to 4,000 troops — a level insufficient to provide force protection and train Iraqis, much less to counterbalance Iran.

Iraqi leaders saw that the United States has headed for the exits — and decided that the tiny U.S. force Obama was willing to leave behind was not worth the political costs of giving Americans immunity from prosecution in the Iraqi judicial system. So Iraq rejected Obama’s offer, and the United States withdrew all its forces. And now ISIS is taking back cities that were liberated with American blood. It has taken control of Mosul, Tikrit and Tal Afar and is nearing the outskirts of Baghdad.

ISIS is not the only U.S. enemy taking advantage of power vacuum Obama left in the region. So is Iran. A month ago, Iraqi leaders asked the United States to carry out air strikes against ISIS positions but were rebuffed by Obama. So the Iraqis have turned to Iran for help. This weekend, the brutal commander of Iran’s notorious Quds Force, Gen. Quasim Suleiman, flew to Baghdad to advise the Iraqis on the defense of Baghdad. This is the man who organized and funded the Shia militias in Iraq, and armed them with EFPs (explosively formed penetrators) — sophisticated armor-piercing roadside bombs that killed hundreds of U.S. troops. And, if you thought matters could not get any worse, the Wall Street Journal reports that Obama “is preparing to open direct talks with Iran on how the two longtime foes can counter the insurgents.” Yes, you read that right. Obama is planning to work with Iran to counter ISIS in Iraq. In other words, our troops may soon be providing air cover for the very Iranians who were killing them.

If Obama had listened to the advice of his commanders on the ground, ISIS would probably not be marching on Baghdad today, and Iran would not be stepping in to fill the void left by the U.S. withdrawal. Thanks to Obama, we may soon have a situation where we are helping our Shia extremist enemies (Iran) fight our Sunni extremist enemies (ISIS) for control of Iraq.

That’s quite an “achievement.”

While President Obama enjoys his 175th and 176th rounds of golf, perhaps inaction will work out for the West: the Iranians will have to expend their own blood and treasure against ISIS (and we should do nothing at all to help them).

 

[The Bread Guy]

To paraphrase this Twitter poster, this Iraqi Army spokesperson's name could NOT be truer ....

"Veritas", indeed ....

 

[tomahawk6]

100 US SF are going to Iraq to train.I would rather see them attached to combat units and bring on the air strikes.The training mission will have to wait until the threat is eliminated.

http://www.armytimes.com/article/20140619/NEWS05/306190049/Report-U-S-send-100-Green-Berets-train-Iraqis

President Barack Obama is also expected to announce Thursday that he is deploying about 100 Green Berets to Iraq to help train and advise Iraqi forces, according to a U.S. official. However, Obama does not plan to announce immediate U.S. airstrikes on Iraq, which have increasingly become less of a focus of deliberations in recent days.

 

[OldSolduer]

I was watching the news and the basic gist I got was that in Northern Iraq, the Kurds et al have set up defences and ISIS (the bad people) are a bit apprehensive about attacking the Kurds.......

 

[MilEME09]

I was watching the news and the basic gist I got was that in Northern Iraq, the Kurds et al have set up defences and ISIS (the bad people) are a bit apprehensive about attacking the Kurds.......

I've read that Kurdish SF have been probing into ISIS controlled towns, and collecting intelligence

 

[Colin Parkinson]

If the US starts bombing stuff, expect the various factions supporting the ISIS to drop a dime on each other in the hopes the US will whack them and remove the threat now that they have pretty much achieved their aims.

 

[OldSolduer]

I've read that Kurdish SF have been probing into ISIS controlled towns, and collecting intelligence

Are the Kurds as nasty as I think they are? I suspect ISIL hasn't gone after them is cause the Kurds may give them a dirty lickin.

 

[a_majoor]

Historically the Kurds were in demand as mercenaries due to their fighting prowess, but the real reason they have remained as a cohesive people is they live in an easily defensible mountain redoubt, that is hard to access even with modern military technology. Think of the Swiss in the 1500's (perhaps the most feared military "people" in Europe at the time) and you should get the idea.

 

[upandatom]

In recent history- (Occupations) has a rebuild of a culture/country/society worked- and at what cost?

Regardless of why the US went into IRAQ, it stopped the mass murder and genocide of people in that Country. IT stopped a legitimate mad man (and his sick and twisted sons), at the head of an army, known to previously possess Chemical weapons and many human rights infringements. (North Korea anyone??)

Closest I can think of that is still far fetched is WW2, that was a flat out war, We used guerilla warfare with the french resistance at that point. Both sides wore uniforms.

The same battles are not being fought anymore. Iraq is destabilizing, Afghanistan hopefully does not once a complete withdrawl is completed. Its not uniform on uniform fighting, its not longer the same type of warfare. On so many fronts we are fighting(seeing) extremists/extremism. Africa, Afghanistan, Iraq. It is so easy nowadays to take and twist religion to uneducated masses and tell them the reason you have no food, no water, is because of the west.

I agree with the theory we tighten our borders right up, same as Europe and the Aussies are, let them fight it out.  Why are we sending soldiers to fight for a cause that ends up being a vicous circle? We help one dictatorship in, then someone else overthrows it puts up there own.

I do feel bad for the women and children, if we could protect them by all means, but 9/10 times we cant. 

MY two cents, we need to step back for a reality check, rebuild, (Not cutback our forces Financially) train and be prepared. Keep a very close and watchful eye.

 

[CougarKing]

An assessment that may be overoptimistic? How can he be sure this Sunni coalition won't stay together longer?

Iraq's Sunnis Will Kick Out ISIS After Dumping Maliki: Ex-CIA Official
By Jeff Stein
6/25/14

Don't panic, Iraq's most powerful Sunnis are telling some old American friends. We'll take care of these upstart ISIS nuts - as soon as they oust Nouri al-Maliki from Baghdad.

That's the message Sheikh Ali Hatem al-Suleiman, leader of Iraq's biggest Sunni tribe, gave John R. Maguire, a retired former CIA deputy station chief in Baghdad, when he visited Iraq three weeks ago to talk about future oil deals in the region.

And Maguire, a veteran senior CIA paramilitary official, believes it. The tribes that once worked with the Americans to defeat Al-Qaeda in Iraq, he insists, will again rise up again to oust its spawn, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria [ISIS] - a movement so extreme it was denounced by Osama bin Laden's successor.

The Sunnis are using ISIS like a crowbar to oust Maliki, Maguire says, and then they'll turn on the invaders. Iraq as we know it will cease to exist, splitting into three new proto-states: Sunnistan in the west, Kurdistan in the north and an Iranian Shiite protectorate stretching from Baghdad east to the Arabian Sea and oil port of Basra. ISIS, in this optimistic scenario, will be pounded into oblivion.


Newsweek

 

[Kat Stevens]

Oh.  Well then.  Problem sorted, whew!  Firm handshakes all around followed by brandy and cigars in the drawring room.

 

[Nemo888]

For a country that has such a powerful army that wins most engagements it's been a very long time since they won a war. Such a mountain of resources to accomplish so little. What a strange empire. Neither evil enough to pluder the conquered and make a profit or good enough to be morally acceptable to the local populace. China and Russia are coming back while America wanes and I wonder how America will deal with a multipolar world after being the only superpower.