Who is responsible for the mess in Iraq and the growth of ISIS?

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 05 Jun 2015 07:05:01 -0400

Member of President Reagan staff pens this article that has some very salient points. What are your thoughts?

http://nationalinterest.org/feature/sorry-obama-didnt-lose-iraq-13030?page=2

Sorry: Obama Didn't Lose Iraq

Here are the men that did...

Response by SGT William Howell made Jun 5 at 2015 7:17 AM

SGT William Howell — Fri, 05 Jun 2015 07:17:16 -0400

Super huge Bush fan, but Bush did it. We took out the only stable leader in Iraq (Saddam), created a vacuum and made it what it is now. Bush did not mean to and none of us saw it coming. Has Obama made it worse with his weak foreign polices and grown ISIS...you bet! I would love to pin another failed attempt at governing on Lord Obama, but this is not on him...entirely.

Response by SGM Mikel Dawson made Jun 5 at 2015 7:20 AM

SGM Mikel Dawson — Fri, 05 Jun 2015 07:20:50 -0400

Not enough choices. Neither Bush or Obama. The only way Bush was involved was through Bremer. BREMER, in my eyes is the main reason along with the OCPA. This along with the basic east meets west thing. We never had much training in Iraqi customs and such which didn't help. Another thing is the muslim factions which can't get along and never will, this didn't help any!

Response by CW2 Joseph Evans made Jun 5 at 2015 7:23 AM

CW2 Joseph Evans — Fri, 05 Jun 2015 07:23:49 -0400

I'm going with an all of the above.

Response by WO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 5 at 2015 7:33 AM

WO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 05 Jun 2015 07:33:46 -0400

it was under control when i left

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Jun 5 at 2015 7:42 AM

Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS — Fri, 05 Jun 2015 07:42:10 -0400

It was like a game of Jenga where the last move was guaranteed to topple the tower. Pres. Bush pulled the last piece, and the tower "started" to fall. In comes new President, "mid fall" and the American People say "well, we don't want to play anymore," before cleaning up the game.

Bush didn't create the mess, he just triggered the final collapse.

The final collapse was going to happen when Saddam died, whether we removed him or not. We may have changed the timeline slightly, but that's all.

Response by SSG Gerhard S. made Jun 5 at 2015 8:02 AM

SSG Gerhard S. — Fri, 05 Jun 2015 08:02:51 -0400

I would go further back to when Churchill took 3 (or more) disparate tribal cultures, and melded them together into a single political entity known as a State, and then expected them to work together with a national identity. Simply drawing lines on a map does not a "country" make.

That being said, shame on our politicians for failing to recognize, or for perhaps ignoring this reality.

Response by PO2 Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 5 at 2015 8:05 AM

PO2 Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 05 Jun 2015 08:05:09 -0400

There should be an "all of the above."

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 5 at 2015 8:08 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 05 Jun 2015 08:08:04 -0400

ISIS. ISIS is responsible. Not sure how that can be clouded.

Response by MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca made Jun 5 at 2015 8:16 AM

MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca — Fri, 05 Jun 2015 08:16:23 -0400

IMHO, ultimately Iraq. That being said, our government as democracy pushers should have let the region reign it's own instead of sticking its nose in under the guise of "US Interests".

Response by COL Charles Williams made Jun 5 at 2015 8:39 AM

COL Charles Williams — Fri, 05 Jun 2015 08:39:28 -0400

Certainly Both administrations.... And all elected and military leaders.... This is a team effort. This goes back to should we have been there, and the book "Breaking Iraq" and the comment that Colin Powell made... "You break it, you own it." We had no phase IV plans... Nor were we ever committed to get the long haul job done. We all failed. LTC Private RallyPoint Member

Response by SPC Jan Allbright, M.Sc., R.S. made Jun 5 at 2015 8:48 AM

SPC Jan Allbright, M.Sc., R.S. — Fri, 05 Jun 2015 08:48:24 -0400

Perhaps someone should look to the actual history?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sykes-Picot_Agreement

Sykes–Picot Agreement - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Sykes–Picot Agreement, officially known as the Asia Minor Agreement, was a secret agreement between the governments of the United Kingdom and France,[1] with the assent of Russia, defining their proposed spheres of influence and control in the Middle East should the Triple Entente succeed in defeating the Ottoman Empire during World War I. The negotiation of the treaty occurred between November 1915 and March 1916.[2] The agreement was...

Response by Maj Chris Nelson made Jun 5 at 2015 9:07 AM

Maj Chris Nelson — Fri, 05 Jun 2015 09:07:45 -0400

So, my personal opinion is that all the above, and yet....NONE of them. If you look at history over the last couple thousand years, you will see that many of the landmarks mentioned in the Bible are actually in what is today known as Iraq (along with surrounding areas). If you look at the conflict and strife in that region, there has ALWAYS been conflict....either in-fighting between each other, OR the come together for a short time to fight a common "enemy" before returning to their in-fighting... an example would be with our branches of service.... Army picking at Air Force, Navy/Marines....cross culture..... but watch what happens when an outsider picks a fight with someone of one branch and other branches are there.....common bond, common enemy.....stomp, then return to the insider banter/etc. It was always there. It will always be there.....

Response by SPC Jan Allbright, M.Sc., R.S. made Jun 5 at 2015 9:09 AM

SPC Jan Allbright, M.Sc., R.S. — Fri, 05 Jun 2015 09:09:59 -0400

Take a look at something that someone that was actually there has to say..

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/iraq-war-on-terror/losing-iraq/david-petraeus-isiss-rise-in-iraq-isnt-a-surprise/

David Petraeus: ISIS’s Rise in Iraq Isn’t a Surprise – Losing Iraq - FRONTLINE

The general who led US troops in Iraq on the surge, and why the U.S. should've seen ISIS coming.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 5 at 2015 9:53 AM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 05 Jun 2015 09:53:33 -0400

THE President of theses United States.

Should've left a presence. He ain't stupid. He knows what he is doing.

Response by SSG Leonard Johnson made Jun 5 at 2015 10:29 AM

SSG Leonard Johnson — Fri, 05 Jun 2015 10:29:52 -0400

OB.... We won when I left the country.....Slick Willie also to blame...he had OBL head on a platter given by Yemen in the 90's.... we should have attacked Iraq mid to late 90's under slick willies leadership (if that is what u want to call leadership).

Response by LTC Ed Ross made Jun 5 at 2015 10:37 AM

LTC Ed Ross — Fri, 05 Jun 2015 10:37:37 -0400

Mr. Corb may have served in the Reagan Administration, as did I, but he is a died in the wool liberal Democrat and does not represent the views of the overwhelming number of Republicans.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 5 at 2015 10:39 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 05 Jun 2015 10:39:21 -0400

The Iraqis. Period. We did our part. We offered more. We were told to leave. They don't want us back now. Presidents Bush and Obama are not the President of Iraq. It is their country. Give them the dignity and respect to figure it out (or not) for themselves.

Response by Sgt Mark Ramos made Jun 5 at 2015 11:08 AM

Sgt Mark Ramos — Fri, 05 Jun 2015 11:08:24 -0400

The linked article is wildly inaccurate and logically flawed. A better piece was done by PBS Frontline. I'll link it here.

"Obama’s hands were tied by the agreement President Bush signed." No, they weren't. President Obama could have changed the deal anytime he wanted. He didn't want to. He campaigned on leaving Iraq and when the time came he was all over the TV proclaiming how he got us out of Iraq. But, he was also saying that he had no choice. How can he both take credit and say he had no choice? Logically, he had a choice. He had the most powerful military in the country at his command. We cleaned up Iraq, we supported Maliki, we provided the money, and we could have changed the deal. By the end of the Iraq withdrawal, the US had already played a key role in the death of Gaddafi. That action, and the things we did in Libya, broke every reason that President Obama gave for not staying in Iraq.

"The current woeful state of the Iraqi military is Obama’s fault—wrong." The article goes on to say how the Iraqi military was in pretty good shape. But also states that Maliki began to put Shiite cronies in charge. That is the key reason for both the rise of IS and the failure of Iraq. President Bush had an active political advisory role to undo, then prevent sectarian reprisals and cronyism. President Obama pulled all that political support and oversight.

"The rise of ISIS is Obama’s fault—wildly wrong." IS rose in response to the Shiite power grab and subsequent attacks on Sunnis. President Obama allowed the Shiites to dominate the Iraqi power structure. He had no interest in oversight in Iraq. He also downplayed the rise of IS. His script was that bin Laden was dead and IS was the JV team. Last year, when IS captured Mosul and robbed the bank for 500 billion dinars they became the world's best funded terrorist organization. At that time President Obama still wasn't taking them seriously. Even now, President Obama is encouraging Iran to engage IS. He wants more Shiites to pour into Iraq! The exact impetus for the rise of IS to begin with. He is throwing oil on a fire.

"It’s Obama’s fault we didn’t nip ISIS in the bud in Syria: hypocritically wrong." IS didn't rise in response to the Syrian civil war, is rose in response to a Shiite dominated Iraq. It got its funding by pillaging Iraqi towns. If anything Syria was merely training ground for military action. IS didn't rise due to US inaction in Syria, it rose due to the US abandoning Iraq.

If you watch the Frontline, you'll see that President Bush made many mistakes in Iraq. Many of you here lived through and paid the consequences of those mistakes. But he kept changing until he got it right. By President Obama's own admission, Iraq was a free and stable sovereign nation when he abandoned it. President Obama said at that time that US forces would be close by and able to respond to flare-ups. But he never followed through. He stood by as IS gained more and more towns, and slaughtered more and more Christians and Shiites. All the while, administration spokespeople downplayed IS's growth and achievements. The same that they do now as the black flag flies over cities that our brothers and sisters gave so much to liberate.

Losing Iraq – FRONTLINE

FRONTLINE examines the unfolding chaos in Iraq: What went wrong? How did we get here? And what happens now?

Response by SFC John Scanlon made Jun 5 at 2015 11:58 AM

SFC John Scanlon — Fri, 05 Jun 2015 11:58:18 -0400

everything became politics, military job was political hacks responsibility, no matter what is ever said I know the men did not lose it, some of our leaders helped with hands out and tails between their legs. But ultimately it was this administrations fault

Response by COL Ted Mc made Jun 5 at 2015 1:14 PM

COL Ted Mc — Fri, 05 Jun 2015 13:14:57 -0400

The only WRONG answer is "President Obama".

It is, however, correct to say that President Obama was unsuccessful in REVERSING the loss he had been handed.

Response by SGT Ben Keen made Jun 5 at 2015 3:01 PM

SGT Ben Keen — Fri, 05 Jun 2015 15:01:10 -0400

The failures in Iraq are the results of more than just those listed on the polls. The actions/failures occurring in Iraq are the responsibility of the political leaders of both countries and of the people of the region. Lets not forget, the Middle East has known nothing but war for over 2,000 years. The countries were formed based on battles fought by leaders who replaced other leaders that were killed or ran out because they were to hard on the people. The new leader was supposed to come in, make everything better and restore peace to the Middle East. Is anyone else seeing the circle here? We see it in the news all the time. One leader is killed and a few days or weeks leader there is some other crazy person in the leadership role.

The people of the region bare some of the responsibility for not taking charge of their defense and taking the lessons we taught them to defend their land against what we all knew would be another group which was later named ISIS.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 5 at 2015 3:04 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 05 Jun 2015 15:04:09 -0400

Can I chose none of the above and select the ottoman Turks?

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 5 at 2015 3:57 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 05 Jun 2015 15:57:27 -0400

President Obama may not have "lost Iraq", but he is directly responsible for allowing it to happen.

As for the article, it is nothing more than crap from a self-proclaimed "Progressive" think tank, Center for American Progress, which was founded by John Podesta, who previously served as Chief of Staff to President Bill Clinton and Counselor to President Barack Obama.

Source: Center for American Progress

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_American_Progress

Source: John Podesta

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Podesta

Do you really think that such a group is going to assign blame to the Obama Administration for squandering the hard fought gains and successes that were achieved in Iraq?

The answer is not only, "No!" but a resounding "HELL NO!"

This article is nothing more than an attempt to deflect criticism away from the foreign policy failures of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

Please, do some research before unquestioningly accepting and spreading political propaganda - for any politician or political party.

Stay true to the facts on the ground.

Having served in Ramadi when the battle there was finally won (2007-2008), and having watched Al Qaeda in Iraq (the father of ISIL/ISIS/IS) destroyed, I know beyond a shadow of a doubt what was accomplished.

I also know who made a campaign promise to remove all troops from Iraq if elected to the Office of President of the United States - Barack Obama.

Even though all of his military advisers - including the then Secretary of Defense, Leon Panetta (Hardly a "War Hawk" or of the Conservative ilk, having served as President Bill Clinton's Chief of Staff) recommended keeping at least a residual force in place within Iraq, Obama chose not to seriously seek out a Statute of Forces Agreement that would have allowed that to take place.

Source: Leon Panetta

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leon_Panetta

Source: Panetta unloads on White House for pulling US forces out of Iraq

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/10/02/panetta-unloads-on-white-house-over-failure-to-leave-us-forces-in-iraq/

By doing so, and putting his political promise above the advice of his Commanders in the field, Obama set into a motion a chain of events that has led us to where we are today.

Yes, there is blame to go around, but there would not have been had it not been for our Enabler-in-Chief for turning his back on the Iraqi People and all those who ever sacrificed and served in Iraq.

Response by CPL Brian Clouser made Jun 5 at 2015 4:41 PM

CPL Brian Clouser — Fri, 05 Jun 2015 16:41:33 -0400

Obama and the democrat congress is responsible the mess that Iraq is now in. They wouldn't let us fight. Too many restrictions on us. " You can't return fire if it came from a mosque." or " you can't use the MK 19 in the city". There are more,of them. Hell, half the time when I was over there I felt more like a cop than I did a soldier

Response by SSG John Jensen made Jun 5 at 2015 4:48 PM

SSG John Jensen — Fri, 05 Jun 2015 16:48:29 -0400

'that we but teach bloody instruction, which, being taught, return to plague the inventor'
Shakespeare MacBeth Act1 sc 7

Response by SSG Ralph Watkins made Jun 5 at 2015 5:09 PM

SSG Ralph Watkins — Fri, 05 Jun 2015 17:09:21 -0400

Why do we have such an insatiable desire to place blame on everything? It's bad enough our political leaders have this childish behavior to point fingers & cry that someone else is at fault. We as military professionals & veterans should be beyond that. What lead up to the rise of ISIS? What were some of the things that happened to allow them to build up to be so large? Where are they going? What can be done to stop them & demoralize them? Blaming people for ISIS doesn't do any good. I marked the Iraqis since when ISIS showed up in Mosul last year, the city had about 20-30,000 Iraqi Army there & less than 1000 ISIS fighters showed up & the Iraqi army dropped their weapons & ran. It was Bush's vision for Iraq to rules itself, Obama gave them that chance, & the Iraqi military was full of cowardice. We can't be blamed for that & nor can we give them courage. They have to fight or die. Stop seeking blame. It's childish & counter-productive.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 5 at 2015 5:18 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 05 Jun 2015 17:18:13 -0400

All of the above! Who put us there? Who took us out? Who failed us with Garbage ROEs? Who Failed us with crappy equipment? Who failed to force his own Police and Military to protect his own country?

Response by SSG Carlos Penalber made Jun 5 at 2015 8:38 PM

SSG Carlos Penalber — Fri, 05 Jun 2015 20:38:47 -0400

Blame can go all around!

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 5 at 2015 9:10 PM

CSM Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 05 Jun 2015 21:10:28 -0400

Who is responsible for the mess in Iraq? That's an easy one. It's been a long-established principle of international law that the sovereign is responsible for its own domestic affairs, so that's none other than the government of Iraq.

Who is responsible for the rise of DAESH? That's pretty easy too. The leaders of DAESH, who have apparently done a fantastic job in building a generally competent and and dedicated fighting force through the amalgamation of otherwise disparate grievances, clever self-promotion and media-savvy activities, and capitalizing on its adversaries' many own-goals to develop and promote a narrative compelling enough to attracts adherents, participants, supporters, and financiers.

Response by SGT Brian Watkins made Jun 5 at 2015 9:41 PM

SGT Brian Watkins — Fri, 05 Jun 2015 21:41:16 -0400

ISIS

Response by PO1 John Miller made Jun 6 at 2015 6:20 AM

PO1 John Miller — Sat, 06 Jun 2015 06:20:09 -0400

Iraq is incapable of taking care of themselves. I think that has been proven time and time again.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 7 at 2015 3:21 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 07 Jun 2015 03:21:38 -0400

What is past is prologue. The 1919 Sykes-Picot Agreement created the arbitrary state borders the international community recognizes today. It is incumbent upon the very same international community to interdict ISIL and their affiliates. And yes, by virtue of our post-1945 world power status, the United States has a particular duty to stamp out threats. Unfortunately, as many know, President Obama has no intent to expand AUMF in the Levant. Hope is not a course of action, but the current government still clings to such a course.

Response by CPL Matthew Victor Spagnuolo made Jun 7 at 2015 11:25 AM

CPL Matthew Victor Spagnuolo — Sun, 07 Jun 2015 11:25:24 -0400

I'll agree w the comment b4 me... ALL OF THE ABOVE. It takes a group effort to make sure that the country didn't fail. However, Obama & Iraq are more DIRECTLY @ fault for the failure, personal opinion is that Bush wasn't responsible for the downfall he only began the mess

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Jun 7 at 2015 2:07 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Sun, 07 Jun 2015 14:07:38 -0400

I blame both presidents, the COIN manual, the Iraqi leaders, army, and the people.

Response by SGT Timothy Rocheleau made Jun 7 at 2015 6:39 PM

SGT Timothy Rocheleau — Sun, 07 Jun 2015 18:39:48 -0400

I love how they always have to try and cast blame for Obama's failures off on President Bush. The current situation in Iraq are directly attributable to Obama, Maliki and failed advisors to the current administration.

Sure, there would still be an ISIS even had we maintained a stronger presence but they surely wouldn't have overrun parts of Iraq as they have. As is the case with Vietnam, our troops hands are tied to include our Soecial Forces who are there on the ground and those pilots doing their fly overs. They all have stated that by the time they get authorization to unleash hell on ISIS they are already gone. Untie our hands and let our men and women do their jobs and this wouldn't be where it's at today.

Obama campaigned on ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and nothing was going to stand in his way of doing so. He remains tunnel visioned on this issue and refuses to heed the advice of those who know what needs to be done. It's his way or you're fired!

The author of this article is no more a Republican than I am still an active duty soldier. He may have been a Repubkican when he worked on President Reagan's staff but his political lean has surely changed since then.

Response by Sgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 8 at 2015 12:40 PM

Sgt Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 08 Jun 2015 12:40:49 -0400

The former V.P. of the United States (D.C.) is a WAR monger and a crook. He manipulated the inept son of his former Boss Geo. H-W Bush into many a dumb move / policy. It is he , a person not listed on your survey, and the pricks involved with something called the 'Project for a New American Century'. They caused the problem (WAR) , have made money off the death of IRAQ Society members and U.S. service people. Have permitted Duel-Citizens types to be placed inside our Federal government. And also are still today , manipulating our government and way of life.

Response by LCDR Bruce Cooley made Jun 8 at 2015 2:24 PM

LCDR Bruce Cooley — Mon, 08 Jun 2015 14:24:51 -0400

I believe that it is the Iraqi Leaders fault due to their version of "ethnic/religious cleansing"..... followed closely by the naivete of President Obama's belief in that countries ability to actually carry on where we left off. President Bush made a similar mistake in putting a "time table to withdraw" due to political pressure from the other side of the aisle, but it is my personal belief that he would have had the political backbone to shake the Iraqi leadership sufficiently to make them either 're-think' their current corrupt way of using the money we sent them, or at a minimum had them do a 'status of forces' agreement that would have left the US with major bases there.....kind of like Germany. From that position, we would have been in a stronger position to help them deal with ISIS.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Jun 9 at 2015 7:19 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Tue, 09 Jun 2015 19:19:51 -0400

This falls on the Iraqi leadership and dubious soldiering. The Iraqi leaders were fooled into thinking their military was tough, its people supportive of the government, and corruption and discrimination would not hurt the country. We need to take some of the blame for meddling in Syria.

Response by SSG Eric Eck made Apr 2 at 2016 6:41 PM

SSG Eric Eck — Sat, 02 Apr 2016 18:41:12 -0400

This goes back as far as Iran/Contra, maybe further.