450 Additional Troops sent to help fight ISIS

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 10 Jun 2015 12:36:32 -0400

I GET IT!

"The collapse of Iraqi security forces, which received billions of dollars in aid and training from the U.S. during its occupation, haunts this divided country today..." It's just not working. Why do we continue to waste money on something that is not working?

I just don't understand why he just can't admit to the error. IS it his pride? Just throw yourself to the mercy of the people you command, say you made an error and FIX it. Just Fix it. (No, I don't think the POTUS is 100% responsible for what is going on there, but he is at least 25% of the problem, if not more. In “Audacity of Hope” he writes: “I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.”) Is that the reason it really doesn't bother him too much? What Muslim side is he on? I am really trying to understand.

http://www.conservativecrusader.com/articles/b-hussein-obama-i-will-stand-with-the-muslims

//"The White House announces up to 450 additional U.S. military personnel will be deployed to Iraq to train and assist Iraqi security forces at a base in Anbar province, to help in their fight against ISIS."//
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/f588909ff5824ffa8ccc386b98ee0f01/us-send-more-troops-iraq-expanded-training-mission

Just call his withdrawal what it really is... a failure.

It is SO apparent what we should do. It's frustrating. I wanna pull my hair out.

NO! WE can't fight everyone's fight. They have got to fight their own battles. I just think that we left these people wide open to the attacks and slaughter that they get and see every single day.

Should we send combat troops to squash ISIS/ISIL?

Because "Iraq (is) still in disarray 1 year after Islamic State took Mosul."
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/1bdf529615f846918f3846fd76d840ad/iraq-still-disarray-1-year-after-islamic-state-took-mosul

Response by 2d Lt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 10 at 2015 12:38 PM

2d Lt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 10 Jun 2015 12:38:54 -0400

At present, I would be for it. I'm sure my opinions and thoughts will be changed as I gain actual experience.

Response by Col Joseph Lenertz made Jun 10 at 2015 12:38 PM

Col Joseph Lenertz — Wed, 10 Jun 2015 12:38:59 -0400

First rule of President Club: It's not my fault.

Response by LTC Stephen F. made Jun 10 at 2015 12:39 PM

LTC Stephen F. — Wed, 10 Jun 2015 12:39:41 -0400

I concur with you SGT Private RallyPoint Member. Hopefully we will develop a strategy that makes sense and follow it through.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 10 at 2015 1:25 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 10 Jun 2015 13:25:40 -0400

We could be in the Middle East for 50 years and it wouldn't be shaped to our liking. The reality is that the post-WWI hastily drawn map under Sykes-Picot has very little correlation with historical borders, tribal lands, ethnic groups, or even Shia/Sunni differences.

Our only real concern is keeping the Straits of Hormuz open and the global energy supply stable. And even then, after 6 decades that's getting old.

We're not going to 'fix' the Middle East. That's an ignorant pipe dream. We could nuke Israel, bow down and kiss the Arabs' feet and they would still find a reason to be anti-American. The Persians and the Turks are a bit better, but not by much.

This foolish pride thing needs to go, pride does not dictate effective foreign policy, Realpolitik does.

"OMG that COWARD OBAMA pulled us out of Iraq before we won!"

We weren't "winning." We were taking the greatest military in the world whose strength is based on Air & Naval power, flexibility, logistics and power projection and turning it into a infantry occupation of a hostile area on the other side of the world.

Iraq isn't a country, and prior to Sykes-Picot didn't even exist on a map (like most of the modern day Middle Eastern countries for that matter).

You can get misled and riled up by ISIS tweets about beheading someone...congrats. You're giving the exact response they want, and screaming for US soldiers to head back to the Middle East. Which fits the Sunni apocalyptic narrative of the Western Crusaders coming to fight an end of days battle against the righteous Jihadis. Well done. Calling for us to deploy right back to Iraq is literally demonstrating we can be outsmarted by some religious nutbags hiding in a mud hut in Eastern Syria.

We cannot shape the future of the Middle East in any constructive manner, we cannot 'pacify' 1.3 billion Muslims, we cannot control the four main powers in the Middle East (Iran, Israel, Saudi, Turkey) and make them puppets/client states/satellites.

So what's the end goal exactly? To stay in Iraq another 8 years and hand the problem off to the next president so we can blame them for our own (delayed) failures? Then say "everything was fine in 2016, then president so-and-so got elected and ran away like a coward!" Brilliant strategy. About as effective as pulling your hair out.

Response by SA Harold Hansmann made Jun 10 at 2015 1:31 PM

SA Harold Hansmann — Wed, 10 Jun 2015 13:31:43 -0400

This says it all

Response by SA Harold Hansmann made Jun 10 at 2015 1:39 PM

SA Harold Hansmann — Wed, 10 Jun 2015 13:39:06 -0400

Remove all our troops and let them solve their own problems.
As for Isis. Permanently disable them at any way possible. If that means there will be martyrs then so be it.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Jun 10 at 2015 2:38 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Wed, 10 Jun 2015 14:38:22 -0400

Many don't realize that Hope is not a Military Strategy.

Response by SFC Collin McMillion made Jun 11 at 2015 12:01 AM

SFC Collin McMillion — Thu, 11 Jun 2015 00:01:17 -0400

450,000 troops might get something accomplished.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 11 at 2015 12:08 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 11 Jun 2015 00:08:18 -0400

Well, seeing how we "trained" them for 10 years and they still can't take care of themselves, how the hell is 450 more American Troops going to do it?

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 11 at 2015 10:39 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 11 Jun 2015 10:39:12 -0400

The Iraqi Security Forces cannot handle the job. I was quick to label it cowardice when ISIS rolled into Mosul, but I think it’s more complicated. I had an instructor friend at the USAF Special Operations School say that the most important thing to an Iraqi man is his family and honor, because that’s all he has. In many cases, that concern won’t extend beyond the man’s front door. As long as ISIS isn’t knocking it down, what does he care that they are tearing up the rest of the country to establish a strict Sharia regimen? When ISIS does show, he’ll fall into a paradigm not far removed from what he living in now, but it will just be sustained by fear. Do what they tell you, he thinks, capitulate to their view of Islam, and there is nothing to fear.

The 3000 troops in Iraq will not be able to train, defend, or motivate ISF. A million troops can’t do that. We are trying to convince them of duty, honor, strength, and courage for the sake of the nation, because that's what we as Americans do really well, and it won’t work. Taking it over and declaring it the 51st state is the least ridiculous option.