Is ISIS winning the fight in Iraq?

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 05 Jun 2015 15:05:15 -0400

Are they winning? Why are they winning? Are we to blame? Did we leave Iraq in a state that would inevitably result in more conflict?

The latest folly at the hands of the Iraqi military has landed millions of dollars of state-of-the-art U.S. military equipment in the hands of ISIS fighters after the Iraqi Army fled from Ramadi. Some blame can be placed at the Iraqi Army's feet for sure. But how much of that blame falls to us?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3111931/Concern-Pentagon-ISIS-shows-military-equipment-seized-Iraqi-troops-latest-video.html

ISIS shows off seized US military equipment in latest video

The footage shows the terrorist group during skirmishesin the town of Karmah, just east of Fallujah, using American-made vehicles including Humvees, cargo trucks and MRAPS.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 5 at 2015 3:25 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 05 Jun 2015 15:25:04 -0400

In regards to achieving their stated aims, yes, ISIS is winning, albeit slowly.
Thus far, Syrian, Iraqi, and US forces have not been able to contain or prevent ISIS from continuing to acquire territory. The arms and ammunition that they seized in Ramadi will be a bonanza for them.
It makes you wonder how close the enemy has to come to the gates before Iraq will get serious about defending itself. It is almost as though they got used to other nations dealing with their security problems and literally forgot how to do it.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 5 at 2015 3:25 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 05 Jun 2015 15:25:47 -0400

At this time, it appears that they are winning the fight. The morale of the Iraqi's is low & few are willing to actually embrace the suck of the battle. The Kurds are holding them off, but the numbers game is not on their side :(
ISIS does actually seem to have some strategists working for them as they withdraw to suck troops in, & then sweep in to cut them off.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 5 at 2015 3:31 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 05 Jun 2015 15:31:05 -0400

I shouldn't let their actions piss me off this much, because they'd love to read that.

But it does. I'm pissed. I didn't even deploy, and I'm infuriated. Is this rational?

Response by Capt Seid Waddell made Jun 5 at 2015 4:01 PM

Capt Seid Waddell — Fri, 05 Jun 2015 16:01:30 -0400

I think the premature withdrawal of our troops is the primary cause of the situation there now. The situation had been stabilized and the factions had started working together - with our supervision.

Cooperative power sharing was not in the history of the region, and it required patience and persistence to develop the necessary experience before it could become self-sustaining.

When we pulled out the first thing the Shia did was to purge the Sunnis in the military leadership and replaced them with Shia officers - alienating the Sunni tribes once again. These were the troops that cut and ran when faced by much smaller ISIS forces.

Abandoned by the U.S., the Iraqi leadership turned to the next most powerful force in the neighborhood, Iran, further alienating the Sunnis.

AQI had been defeated in the Anbar Awakening, but was able to reconstitute itself and grow stronger in the fighting in Syria, before returning in force to Iraq. Even seeing these forces entering Iraq we stood by doing nothing until we were shamed into taking some show of force by the civilian massacres following ISIS's advance.

It would have been possible to have damaged ISIS by a serious air campaign when they were in the open in Iraq before they had taken major cities - but we only sent a hand full of air strikes that had minimal effect.

The longer the U.S. and the world delays striking ISIS the more difficult and bloody the fight will have to become.

One would think that the world had learned something from the same sort of situation in the 1930s when Hitler invaded the Sudetenland and could have been stopped with relative ease.

But inaction then ended up throwing the world into a world war that took over 60 million lives before it was over.

And that was before nuclear weapons, which will cause far greater destruction.

Simply because the world dithers once again in the face of determined barbarism.

Response by SPC Sheila Lewis made Aug 17 at 2015 2:18 PM

SPC Sheila Lewis — Mon, 17 Aug 2015 14:18:44 -0400

For the moment, but with changes in the politics and economics of the US, Service personnel will bring guns to a gunfight.