Obama didn’t leave fast enough and we should never been there to begin with.By leaving when the heavy lifiting was over, Obama snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.
The ME will be reaping the poisoned fruits of that blunder for some time to come.
For the rest of the world, the best that can be hoped for is that the Sunnis and the Shias engage in this battle against each other for quite some time to come. That at least spells somewhat of a reprieve for those on the outside.
As bad as the relationship often was between Shiites and Sunni in Iraq, they actually got along nervously but reasonably well after we had pacified the country. The Kurds, of course, were essentially independent, have their own militias, and were rarely messed with by anybody after Saddam fell.By leaving when the heavy lifiting was over, Obama snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.
The ME will be reaping the poisoned fruits of that blunder for some time to come.
For the rest of the world, the best that can be hoped for is that the Sunnis and the Shias engage in this battle against each other for quite some time to come. That at least spells somewhat of a reprieve for those on the outside.
Which ignores, of course, the ability and will of people like Iraqis to develop a nation if protected from the outside forces that are now tearing it apart. It assumes an inherent inability of peoples (particularly an educated people, which a lot of Iraqis are) to refrain from savagery and govern themselves.Obama didn’t leave fast enough and we should never been there to begin with.
The situation you see now in Iraq, was coming regardless of when we left. It was just a matter of how many American lives we wanted to lose, and how much taxpayers would be willing to pay to keep Iraq out of an all out civil war.
Jim
Iraqis are aligned religiously and tribally before their nationally.Which ignores, of course, the ability and will of people like Iraqis to develop a nation if protected from the outside forces that are now tearing it apart. It assumes an inherent inability of peoples (particularly an educated people, which a lot of Iraqis are) to refrain from savagery and govern themselves.
I really thought that kind of thinking went out with “Wogs begin at Calais” and related concepts.
Gosh, Obama honored the treaty obligations which Bush signed. Imagine that.By leaving when the heavy lifiting was over, Obama snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.
After the U.S. victory over Saddam and the Jihadis in Iraq, and after Iranian agent, Al Sadr, fled to Iran, all truly indigenous parties were quiescent and wanted the U.S. to stay in order to prevent a return of the “caliphate jihadis” and the Iranians. The Sunni tribal leaders denounced the jihadis and aided us in pursuing them. Sistani himself challenged Al Sadr to stop warring on his fellow (and majority) Shiites. When Obama refused to negotiate a status of forces agreement renewal, the Sunnis, Kurds and Shiites begged us to stay. The Kurds even bought U.S. television time to thank us. Remember that? But Obama had made an election promise to end “Bush’s war” (which was already over) refused to negotiate seriously, and pulled out. Obama’s act in doing that was indefensible from many aspects. It opened Iraq up to being a battleground to foreign invaders in a region that affects the whole world. It betrayed those who had helped us. ItIraqis are aligned religiously and tribally before their nationally. Yes, with some exceptions. But it does not mean they have no national adherence at all.
The Shiite’s are the majority who were oppressed by Saddam and the Sunni’s prior to the fall. They are religiously aligned with Iran, and religion outweighs everything. **Not true. The Iraqi Shiites are Arabs. Iranians are predominately Indo-European, with Arab and Kurd minorities. Al Sadr is an Iranian agent, and that’s known. But Sistani, who was the leader of most Shiites, certainly wasn’t. He was very leery of Iran. Ethnicity outweighs Islamic religious sect with most Iraqi Shiites. **
The Sunni’s are now the minority and are being squeezed out of the nations oil revenues. Some think so, and it might be true.
The Kurds, never got along with either group, but their biggest threat now is from Turkey.** To Kurds in Turkey, the ethnic Turks are a big threat. Turkey intervened in Iraqi Kurdish border areas to quell cross-border incursions. But at present, Turkey is no great threat to Iraqi Kurds. After Ergodan decimated the army, Turkey’s ability to threaten its neighbors is not what it once was.**
Now, if you believe that US military presence in Iraq would’ve made things better over time, you really don’t understand the culture over there. It was a losing endeavor when Bush sent us in and it was only a matter of time before an all out civil war erupted and would’ve come, even with our presence, except that we would’ve gotten involved in it, which would be worse for us. **The “civil war” that went on when we were there was not really a civil war. Largely foreign jihadis and Iranians fought both our troops and each other. Ultimately, we beat the jihadis and Al Sadr fled to Iran. Both came back only after we left. **
Obama was right to get us out of Iraq, but keep in mind, our leaving date was established between the Bush administration and the Iraqi government. Obama merely followed through on that agreement, but he did try to keep a military presence there, which the Iraqi’s refused. **The prior agreement was up for renewal. Obama refused to negotiate seriously because he promised to pull out. So he didn’t. There was no agreement because of that. **
The same is happening in Afghanistan, Obama want’s to keep a significant military presence there, and Karzai is refusing. He’s refusing because he knows it’s only a matter of time before the Taliban regain control and he flees for his life with his treasure. Karzai is doing us Americans a favor by not allowing Obama to keep a military presence there.
Afghanistan is not Iraq. Comparing the two is like comparing Germany to Sierra Leone
Jim
It was right for Bush to strike the Taliban and Al Quaeda in Afghanistan, despite the fact that the Taliban is supported by Pakistan, upon which we depended to give us access.Maybe it was idealistic to think that good would prevail in iraq and afghanistan or that a positive change would take hold.
I believe there were people in iraq and afganistan who wanted hope for something better. For those of us who have been fortunate to live in america with our freedoms we do not comprehend the way of life over there.
I also feel after 9/11 and after so many terrorist attacks around the world our government felt like enough was enough and we needed to respond. The tragedy of what happened on 9/11 and the nature of the attacks using planes filled with innocent people to attack the world trade center and the pentagon and whatever the 4th attack was to be
had to be responded to. The scope of the 9/11 attack was too enormous not to want to try to get the terrorists.
I’m sure it does put them at risk. It puts all Iraqis, even the Sunni at risk. They’re well-trained and well-armed foreign fighters for the most part, and think death killing infidels (even imagined ones) earns them martyrdom.And now the Jihadists have captured Tikrit dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2014/Jun-12/259809-tikrit-falls-after-lightning-isis-advance.ashx#axzz34NVZZclN Amazing how the Jihadists went from sporadic suicide bomb attacks to seizing major cities in the last 6 months. Not much mention of them growing in strength until after they captured large areas. This means Christians are really at risk naharnet.com/stories/en/134509-italian-catholic-community-warns-christians-at-risk-in-iraq
Ridgerunner, do you think if saddam had been left in power iraq would be where it is today or do you think he needed to be captured?I’m sure it does put them at risk. It puts all Iraqis, even the Sunni at risk. They’re well-trained and well-armed foreign fighters for the most part, and think death killing infidels (even imagined ones) earns them martyrdom.
At some point, they will clash directly with the Iranian-backed insurgents and Iranian regulars, and then we’ll see a bloodbath like that in Syria, only worse.
We left when we did because the Iraqi government did not want us there.I do not think it’s an exaggeration at all. All three major groups in Iraq asked us to stay.
Well lets examine what really happened here. This wasn’t Barney Fief vs. the Bloods and Crips. This was two divisions consisting of 30,000 Iraqi soldiers trained and very heavily armed by the United States running from 800 insurgents.Many, possibly even most, of the jihadis in Iraq and Syria are foreigners to those countries. The jihadi cause draws the murderous and crazy from all over the Islamic world. They know the world value of Iraq even if this administration doesn’t. Iranian-aligned groups and Iranian regulars are there too. How would law enforcement be in, say, St. Louis if every gang member in the U.S. suddenly moved there and decided to prey on the populace. Local efforts at law enforcement would fail utterly and immediately. I don’t think people would then say “Well, St. Louisans had it coming since they couldn’t even defend their own city.” People would say the very best in law enforcement help from all over the country should be dispatched to St. Louis. And it would take a lot longer than 8 years to clean the place up and establish lasting order.
Airstrikes aren’t going to matter if the behavior of Iraq’s military is any indication. Might want to neutralize the fighter jets, tanks, helicopters, etc. that the Iraqi military just handed over to the insurgents though.Iraq government open to U.S airstrikes against Islamist militants, a U.S. official says. cnn.it/1nwIQFG
Obama hasn’t made a decision though.
I agree without strong boots on the ground, airstrikes with jets and drones won’t do much.Airstrikes aren’t going to matter if the behavior of Iraqi’s military is any indication. Might want to neutralize the fighter jets, tanks, helicopters, etc. that the Iraqi military just handed over to the insurgents though.