The deployment of up to 1,500 more troops authorized for Iraq.

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 07 Nov 2014 18:28:31 -0500

Today our President authorized an additional 1500 more troops to Iraq to battle ISIS. If all 1,500 are deployed, it would almost double the American presence in Iraq. The troops will serve in a non-combat role, expanding the U.S. mission of training and advising Iraqi forces, the "Pentagon said". That will include helping Iraqi forces in the highly volatile section of Anbar Province mostly under ISIS control. As reported by NBC.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/102129732

So have we passed the point of continually stating "no boots on the ground"? And if our troops are in a high volatile section controlled by ISIS are we really non-combat? Are our troops under any ROE's or are they under direction to not respond to any action that may put them in harms way?

I think we are getting close to the point of no return and the inevitable fight we really don't want to start in country again. Not that it has really ever stopped.

Politics

Get the latest news, commentary and video for political events, politics, and the government.

Response by SSG Jeremy Siebenaller made Nov 7 at 2014 6:31 PM

SSG Jeremy Siebenaller — Fri, 07 Nov 2014 18:31:19 -0500

And here we go again!

Response by SSG Jeremy Siebenaller made Nov 7 at 2014 6:42 PM

SSG Jeremy Siebenaller — Fri, 07 Nov 2014 18:42:35 -0500

I said it the day that we left....We'll be back! We should have never left is a state of such array! They were defenseless and we knew it. We tore them down, gave them the tools and never taught them how to use them! Its our fault they are where they are and our duty as humans to pick them back up to where they were

Response by SGT Richard H. made Nov 7 at 2014 7:00 PM

SGT Richard H. — Fri, 07 Nov 2014 19:00:02 -0500

NO.BOOTS.ON.THE.GROUND.

The floor is now open for comments.

Response by SFC Mark Merino made Nov 7 at 2014 7:07 PM

SFC Mark Merino — Fri, 07 Nov 2014 19:07:37 -0500

Godspeed one and all. Get it done and bring your butts home!

Response by SFC Boots Attaway made Nov 7 at 2014 7:07 PM

SFC Boots Attaway — Fri, 07 Nov 2014 19:07:12 -0500

Those who thought we were through over there are as stupid as the one that pulled everyone out of there.

Response by SGT Michael Glenn made Nov 7 at 2014 7:14 PM

SGT Michael Glenn — Fri, 07 Nov 2014 19:14:04 -0500

Didnt our fathers get their ass's kicked in nam with this sort of thing??? they called it a police action and not a combat action if I am not mistaken.

Response by SGT Steven Montgomery made Nov 7 at 2014 7:32 PM

SGT Steven Montgomery — Fri, 07 Nov 2014 19:32:31 -0500

More troops eventually, no doubt about it in my humble opinion.

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 7 at 2014 8:23 PM

PO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 07 Nov 2014 20:23:10 -0500

What?!? Am I the only one that saw the camel poke it's nose under the tent flap? sheeeesh.... this "new" deployment was in the works for months......just waiting on the right diplomatic or political moment to publish.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 7 at 2014 8:30 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 07 Nov 2014 20:30:03 -0500

The real question is with the deep cuts to troop levels, where will he find 1500 deployment-ready troops to deploy?

Response by SGT Hutch Dubosque made Nov 7 at 2014 9:15 PM

SGT Hutch Dubosque — Fri, 07 Nov 2014 21:15:43 -0500

Not happy!

Response by SSG Jeremy Siebenaller made Nov 7 at 2014 10:20 PM

SSG Jeremy Siebenaller — Fri, 07 Nov 2014 22:20:45 -0500

Politician after politician can send us to and bring us from. They can will elections based on the fact that they brought us from, and they have to convince that our NATIONS security is at risk to send us to. The only problem with this is that they will send us to do a mean and evil job, one that none of us necessarily WANT to do but stand ready if the need should arise, then prosecute us when we do our job. We should never go to a country and simply occupy it. We should never go to a country without overwhelmingly scary numbers of troops and armor. We should never go IN planning on an exit strategy that doesn't involve ALOT of casualties and collateral damage. War is hell and nobody wants it, but that's what we are here for. Thats why we join. Sending 1500 troops to do a job that 150,000 should be...isn't anything shy of someone trying to save their asses in the Pentagon! If we are going to send troops and feel the need to deploy them again...than we should deploy with plans of doing one thing and one thing only. Killing every one of these poor dumb bastards. We should never want to isolate. We should never want to mitigate.We should destroy! That is the ONLY way to get rid of these people. Simply terminate them! Only sending 1500 troops over is nothing but dangerous! We are putting these 1500 in so much danger by sending them somewhere that they are out numbered 10 to 1 its ridiculous! We will send these 1500, a couple 10 will get killed and then the POTUS will be right back on the TV telling us some other bullshit like "They're a bigger threat than we originally thought, so we are going to send over a Brigade of troops. The troops will only be there for support and training" and like the sheep that we are....we'll say "well hell! These ISIS guys aren't no joke! We better send more troops!" When if we would just send enough troops to overwhelm and intimidate these jerk-offs in the first place we wouldn't have NO worries.....but here were are! 1500 at a time!

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 7 at 2014 11:03 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 07 Nov 2014 23:03:20 -0500

What kind of authority will American advisors have over Iraqi soldiers?
Since the beginning of time, foreign advisors have often served as de facto commanders, issuing orders directly to the troops or through the mouthpiece of the nominal indigenous commander. In contrast, there are also plenty of historical examples of foreign advisors being ignored by their indigenous charges. Given the Iraq government’s suspicion regarding U.S. motives, what role U.S. advisors will be able to play in guiding Baghdad’s military operations is a critical question.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 7 at 2014 11:05 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 07 Nov 2014 23:05:58 -0500

Good luck ya'll... knew it was coming.

Response by SGT(P) Harry Clyde Jr. made Nov 8 at 2014 2:43 AM

SGT(P) Harry Clyde Jr. — Sat, 08 Nov 2014 02:43:54 -0500

Round 3. It seems that the higher ups dont read or understand the history of this region.
It has been at war for centuries both with its self and with any outsider that tries to change or absorb it. The crusades, romans, Macedonians etc. All with great leaders who had some limited success but eventually were pushed back. The capabilities of those from the region have always been underestimated by those outsiders with superior numbers and weaponry. It doesn't matter if you overthrow a government there. There is always someone waiting in the wings and for the most part those not living in the major cities are highly independent and dont care any way as long as they are not bothered. Yes ISIS is a threat to the region. They are not the first radical group/religion to do so. They are like ants, destroy some or a colony for that matter another pops up cause you cant eliminate all of them.You also cant identify them cause they can easily blend in with others around them.
Round 2 was not necessary. Hussein was contained and was just saber rattling. Too many lives , time, equipment and money was wasted on that one.
Round 3 would be more of the same just as history tells us.
We do not need to go back in there just to appease the richer nations i.e. Saudi Arabia, UAE, etc.
In time ISIS will peter out as all dominating groups in the region have. Unless they attack europe or home in force, just leave this one alone cause for every one person we kill, another 5 will take his/her place.
Want to destroy isis/ radicals? Hit them where it hurts, the pocketbook/funding.
We should worry about the radicalization at home first rather than try to defeat the hydra overseas.
My 2 bits.

Response by 1LT Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 8 at 2014 5:03 AM

1LT Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 08 Nov 2014 05:03:24 -0500

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member.

Precisely what is the total number of these supposedly limited "advisor" boots are now authorized to be in country?

The US Military Assistance Advisory Group (MAAG) in South Vietnam started with 128 advisors in 1950, grew to 342 advisors in 1954, grew again to 685 advisors in 1960, grew again to almost 3,000 advisors in 1962, and grew again to 3,250 advisors in 1963. Following the coup de etat by Maj Gen Nguyen Khan supported by the United States in January 1964 . . . the US Military Assistance Command Vietnam (MACV) grew to 23,300 advisors by December 1964.

In other words, we advised and supported a corrupt elitist government increasingly alienated from their people from 1950 through 1963 . . . then supported a coup d'etat to replace that totally ineffective government in 1964 . . . then rapidly ramped up US advisor commitment . . . and then US combat troop commitment to unsustainable levels . . . all the while trying to impose our goals, mission, and standards on local government, community, and fighting forces.

Source: http://www.history.army.mil/html/books/091/91-6/CMH_Pub_91-6.pdf

What makes anyone think a strategy that ultimately foundered in Vietnam from 1950 to 1975 is any different now?

Warmest Regards, Sandy

Response by SGT(P) Harry Clyde Jr. made Nov 8 at 2014 10:59 AM

SGT(P) Harry Clyde Jr. — Sat, 08 Nov 2014 10:59:23 -0500

Id hate to say it but if Hussein was left in power and we never went in the second time, which wasnt necessary, This ISIS issue may have never came up. Yes he and his sons were brutal, arrogant and loved saber rattling. But they had an infrastructure, people were working and the various religions generally got along. He was contained.
All that was destroyed during the invasion. We kind of opened the door on this one then removed it so that any radical can walk in. Here ya go all yours now. Sometimes your worst enemy can be your greatest asset in preventing disaster and tragedy.
Some things should be left to their own devices.
My 2 bits.

Response by Capt Richard I P. made Nov 8 at 2014 12:10 PM

Capt Richard I P. — Sat, 08 Nov 2014 12:10:01 -0500

"WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH "

-Name that Quote.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 8 at 2014 12:16 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 08 Nov 2014 12:16:54 -0500

My concern is how in the hell do you put our troops in Anbar Province, mostly under ISIS control and claim they will be in a "non-combatant role!" Just their presense makes them targets of opportunity, and we know ISIS will do all they can to exploit this. I'm very troubled as to what rules of engagement our troops will be placed under; And what happened to no boots on the ground? Deploying in flip-flops and sandals? Another step closer returning to the fight that we walked away from earlier! I worry deeply for our returning troops!

Response by CSM Michael J. Uhlig made Nov 8 at 2014 8:34 PM

CSM Michael J. Uhlig — Sat, 08 Nov 2014 20:34:41 -0500

I'll go back...to Al Anbar Province....again....was in the surge (OIF 05-07) with 1-36 Infantry (our HHC & A co in Hit, Iraq & our B & C co in Ramadi, Iraq)

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 9 at 2014 6:04 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 09 Nov 2014 06:04:38 -0500

Sounds like this is going to be the war for the next guy/gal in office. President Obama is goi g