What will be the tipping point for U.S. intervention of ISiS in Iraq?

SFC(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 15 Jun 2014 17:23:47 -0400

To me intervention is inevitable. I don't believe our leaders will stand by for much longer after a decade of sacrifice in Iraq. I believe a final chapter/campaign of OIF may be on the horizon. What do you think is an appropriate decisive point to intervene? Will the U.S. lead a Unified Land Operation/Surgical Strike or intervene less directly with funding and Air/Drone Strike options?

Response by 1SG Chris Brown made Jun 15 at 2014 6:40 PM

1SG Chris Brown — Sun, 15 Jun 2014 18:40:28 -0400

I don't think we'll lend any further ground troops to Iraq, at least I hope not. We have had more than enough die there just to have the Iraqis go right back to the same old thing as soon as we left. I don't want to see our military continue there for the next 100 years, no way. As for the tipping point, if our embassy were attacked and Americans were killed, that might drive us to further action. But I don't see the President committing anything more than airstrikes and drone usage over Iraq. Time will tell...

Response by Sgt Adrian Manso made Jun 16 at 2014 11:36 AM

Sgt Adrian Manso — Mon, 16 Jun 2014 11:36:35 -0400

I Agree that intervention is indeed inevitable. What that entails will be soon evident to us. I think we will intervene through financial support and air support. If we put boots on the ground it will be to protect our embassy, but I would not be surprised if we carried out covert special ops for specific targeted missions throughout the next year!

Response by SFC Matthew Parker made Jun 16 at 2014 11:55 AM

SFC Matthew Parker — Mon, 16 Jun 2014 11:55:45 -0400

The tipping point came and went, it was the mass killings of 1700 people in the last 48 hours by ISIS. I think were stuck in neutral because the Iranians sent 500 troops and the head of their special forces and the Iraqi Prime Minister decided to make a stand at Shia religious sites. We can't do much but air strikes at this point and that's not going to stop a full out civil war.

Response by WO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 16 at 2014 6:30 PM

WO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 16 Jun 2014 18:30:04 -0400

In terms of direct ground support in Iraq, we are facing a lose-lose situation at the political level. Considering the statements made by our current president and our withdrawal from the country, putting boots on ground is sending the message that we made a mistake by pulling out when we did. On the other hand, letting the current government fall through inaction or minimal involvement sends a message of apathy especially concerning the sacrifices our brothers and sisters made to take, build, and maintain Iraq.

As to whether or not we will pursue any particular course of action, I honestly couldn't say. I would be hard pressed to chose either of these options, though I would lean towards the reoccupation of Iraq with the mindset of stabilizing the area for the next 30+ years. Picture a similar situation to Korea albeit with an immanent internal (terrorist organizations like Al Qaeda) rather than external threat (North Korea).

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 22 at 2014 12:06 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 22 Jun 2014 00:06:59 -0400

The tipping point is ISIS taking over the US Embassy. But we all know that isn't going to happen. Send the military advisers over there and that'll be enough. Time to make Iran more powerful within the region

Response by Sgt Packy Flickinger made Jul 16 at 2014 3:34 AM

Sgt Packy Flickinger — Wed, 16 Jul 2014 03:34:20 -0400

2016 election going Republican.

Response by GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad made Mar 15 at 2015 12:30 PM

GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad — Sun, 15 Mar 2015 12:30:54 -0400

Response by CPT Jack Durish made Mar 15 at 2015 12:51 PM

CPT Jack Durish — Sun, 15 Mar 2015 12:51:51 -0400

That ship may have already sailed. If we had left a "trigger force" in Iraq as we did in Japan, Germany, and Korea (as we should have done in Vietnam), Iraq and Vietnam would have remained secure. Like Japan, Germany, and Korea, they might have prospered and become great allies and trading partners. Like those other successes, they might have served as an example to the nations around them. But again, that ship has sailed.

Could we return and attempt to get it right? Well, we didn't in Vietnam and I suspect the same will be true in Iraq. (History does, after all, repeat itself for good or for ill.)

In every case, we who served and are still serving, can take pride in our victories - Japan, Germany, Vietnam, and Iraq included. Then we have to let go and see what the idiots in the District of Calamity will make of them - successes or failures.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 15 at 2015 1:04 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 15 Mar 2015 13:04:49 -0400

I feel like we need to intervene. But, not until we can name the evil we face. We need to realize the true motives of our enemy and have a battle plan around it. No one is talking about the genesis of this coming out of the WWI broken promises to the Arab world. No one's talking about the fact these monsters are driven by a belief that they're ushering in the apocalypse. We must stop responding with the assumption that they fight with western values and motives. It's killing us. Iran is a similar situation.

Response by COL Ted Mc made Mar 15 at 2015 2:42 PM

COL Ted Mc — Sun, 15 Mar 2015 14:42:22 -0400

SFC(P) Private RallyPoint Member Sergeant; Wild guess here, but I expect that the "tipping point" will be whatever happens about 20 minutes after the next President of the United States of America is sworn in (thus leaving the voters with four years to forget that ALL the candidates "promised" that there wouldn't be any more "American boots-on-the-ground").

Response by MSgt Manuel Diaz made Mar 15 at 2015 3:23 PM

MSgt Manuel Diaz — Sun, 15 Mar 2015 15:23:57 -0400

We are past the tipping point, accept we have entered another holy war or crusades and still escalating until it is undeniable