Iraq: Choose your presidential options.

[illram]

I'm not sure what else beyond permanent occupation the US could do. Ignoring the (stupid) decision to invade in the first place, we trained and armed a national army and set up a quasi democratic government. What further milestone should we have waited for prior to leaving Iraq to the Iraqi's? If the answer is "when the government's control was solidified over the insurgency," then you are essentially advocating for a large sustained US military occupation in Iraq for at least another decade, with no guarantees that even that creates a secure state.

I think Iraq is a distraction from the immediate catalyst for this particular problem--Syria. Should we have intervened militarily there? Would an intervention have prevented more militant groups such as ISIS from gaining control, as other middle east countries are ironically claiming?

 

[JollyRoger]

Note the operative phrase.

Funny how passed on debt comes up in this context and not in others.

J

Given the performance, we overpaid, but that is what is expected with any government project.

 

[Cutlass]

Note the operative phrase.

Funny how passed on debt comes up in this context and not in others.

J

We got something for the other debt. All the Iraq money was just pissed down a hole.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Saddam Hussein strongly favoured Sunnis over Shias. While Saddam was personally hostile to Islamists, the recent ISIS uprising was supported by former Ba'athists.

Do you think it might possibly be because he was a Sunni himself?

So what's your point? That you agree with what I have posted in regard to direct involvement by Baathists and other Sunnis who are not Islamists? That further sectarian violence and possibly even a civil war was inevitable due to the incompetent meddling by the US government and others over a decade ago?

 

[innonimatu]

I think Iraq is a distraction from the immediate catalyst for this particular problem--Syria. Should we have intervened militarily there? Would an intervention have prevented more militant groups such as ISIS from gaining control, as other middle east countries are ironically claiming?

Does handing over weapons and intel to rebels, training them and facilitation their logistics count as a military intervention? if so, then then problem as that you did intervene there in the first place.

Invade the place? Apart from the fact that they'd probably resist far more fiercely than the Iraqis did back in 2003, thus the cost would be grater, there's the small observation that the place which you did invade is now one plagued with such groups! Are you willing to occupy the whole middle east, militarily, into the foreseeable future? Because that's what it takes to "keep it stable" through military means.

 

[onejayhawk]

Does handing over weapons and intel to rebels, training them and facilitation their logistics count as a military intervention? if so, then then problem as that you did intervene there in the first place.

Invade the place? Apart from the fact that they'd probably resist far more fiercely than the Iraqis did back in 2003, thus the cost would be grater, there's the small observation that the place which you did invade is now one plagued with such groups! Are you willing to occupy the whole middle east, militarily, into the foreseeable future? Because that's what it takes to "keep it stable" through military means.

We could take the place apart because we know where EVERYTHING is. Saddam had a decades to dig in and hide.

J

 

[Kaitzilla]

for the purposes of discussion under discussion the geographic term is not that old and there's no 'stan whatsoever . For access to sea this is how our idiots running the country and the think tanks and stuff have all become Kurdish ; stealing Arabian oil is the sole things defines great power status afterall .

Wow, you are right.
Turkey seems to be all for the idea now.


http://rudaw.net/english/kurdistan/130620142

ERBIL, Kurdistan Region—The Kurds of Iraq have the right to decide the future of their land, said Huseyin Celik, a spokesman for Turkey’s ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) on Friday.

“The Kurds of Iraq can decide for themselves the name and type of the entity they are living in,” Celik told Rudaw in an interview to be published soon.

The AKP is the party of Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan under whom Ankara and Erbil have built strong economic and diplomatic relations.

In case Iraq gets partitioned, said Celik, “the Kurds, like any other nation, will have the right to decide their fate.”

Celik believes that Iraq is already headed towards partition thanks to “Maliki’s sectarian policies.”

In the past several days fighters of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) have occupied most of Iraq’s Sunni areas in the center of the country.

They have declared war on Nouri al-Maliki’s Shiite government whom they accuse of persecuting the Sunni population.

“Turkey has been supporting the Kurdistan Region till now and will continue this support,” said Celik.

Turkey and Kurdistan have signed a 50-year energy deal and Kurdish oil is exported via a pipeline that connects the autonomous region to the port of Ceyhan on the Mediterranean.

I think I see what changed.

Goodbye Iraq, was nice knowing you.

 

[Kaitzilla]

Protect our new $750 million embassy in Baghdad! ...

Yup, reinforcements arrived right away.
http://www.navytimes.com/article/20...U-S-soldiers-arrive-U-S-Embassy-compound-Iraq

The Pentagon has deployed about 100 troops — including more than 50 Marines attached to a Fleet Antiterrorism Security Team to the U.S. Embassy compound in Baghdad, Iraq, to help protect diplomatic personnel and property...


...The arrival of FAST Marines and a contingent of U.S. soldiers on the ground in Iraq on Sunday marked the first operational deployment of U.S. troops there since the withdrawal of combat forces in December 2011. Pentagon officials declined to identify the Army unit deployed to Baghdad. The Marine platoon is based out of nearby Bahrain, and is tasked with protecting American personnel and property, said Master Sgt. William Price, a spokesman for Marine Corps Forces Central Command.

FAST Marines are the traditional go-to assets when U.S. embassies require reinforcement in times of crises. The Marine Corps has two more forward-deployed FAST elements in Spain and Japan.

“This is a temporary thing,” Kirby said Monday. “There is no intention that this is any kind of permanent plus up. They are there temporarily, to assist with some relocation of some personnel who work at the embassy. They are not engaged in ferrying to and fro anyone. No military aircraft … is being used to ferry these folks.”

On Monday, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel ordered the amphibious transport dock Mesa Verde, part of the Bataan Amphibious Ready Group, to enter the Persian Gulf. It joins the carrier George H. W. Bush, which Hagel ordered to enter the Gulf on Saturday.

I hope no one blames Obama for sending a few troops back into Iraq now. They doing a very important job.

 

[r16]

Goodbye Iraq, was nice knowing you.

not the time to bet on it , though .

 

[illram]

Does handing over weapons and intel to rebels, training them and facilitation their logistics count as a military intervention? if so, then then problem as that you did intervene there in the first place.

Invade the place? Apart from the fact that they'd probably resist far more fiercely than the Iraqis did back in 2003, thus the cost would be grater, there's the small observation that the place which you did invade is now one plagued with such groups! Are you willing to occupy the whole middle east, militarily, into the foreseeable future? Because that's what it takes to "keep it stable" through military means.

I really don't know what we should have done in Syria, if anything. It does seem odd that we were so quick to action in Libya, but then when we have actual real evidence of crimes against humanity occurring somewhere else, we do nothing. Certainly the whole "red line" blunder did not help, since world politics is so fickle and since international power games are sort of law of the jungle-ish. (Which is probably why random people off the street fare better when trying to guess future world events than the CIA.) I also do not know if there is a link between what sort of assistance we did provide in Syria and ISIS, although I would not doubt that of the materiel we did funnel into the country, directly or indirectly, some of it is in the hands of bad people.

The funny (sad?) thing is that Washington foreign policy wonks will probably just look at this and say "see? we need to go back to propping up evil ruthless dictators for stability's sake!"

 

[CavLancer]

Stability? I think it was all about bases in strategic locations. I guess that will be starting up again...

Huh, drones and airforce is catching up with root for the good guys. I'm still alone in voting for give em ammo, nothing else. Its kinda lonely being the only one right.

 

[FriendlyFire]

Stability? I think it was all about bases in strategic locations. I guess that will be starting up again...

Huh, drones and airforce is catching up with root for the good guys. I'm still alone in voting for give em ammo, nothing else. Its kinda lonely being the only one right.

Colbert says we should support ISIS whom is the enemy of Iran.

 

[illram]

Well it was not for stability's sake; the Cliff's Notes version is stability to ensure continuing and long lasting favorable conditions for American economic and military interests.

 

[CavLancer]

FriendlyFire, its a no win situation whomever we support. At this point I'd suggest our support shouldn't go further than a fruitcake at Christmas unless Makati (sp) steps down.

Ah okay, illram, I see it now.

 

[FriendlyFire]

FriendlyFire, its a no win situation whomever we support. At this point I'd suggest our support shouldn't go further than a fruitcake at Christmas unless Makati (sp) steps down.

I dont think that would make any difference.

Maj. Andrew Rohrer, who served in Iraq as a junior officer, blamed feuding Iraqi politicians for the country’s collapse, calling the war “an Iraqi problem that we never could have fixed in a hundred years.”

Well, a certain Draft dodger AWOL national guard became president whom though war is romantic and a VP whom got deferment after deferment made the very same mistakes as those in the Vietnam war. Hopefully these lessons are taken to heart this time.

The military’s post-Vietnam narrative, which pinned the blame for its loss on the Johnson administration, largely absolved the Army of its own mistakes during the Vietnam War. This view held for years and eventually gave rise to a muscular U.S. military force that smashed Hussein’s forces in two conflicts but was ill-prepared for long guerrilla wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.