“The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of ‘liberalism’ they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.”

Socialist Party presidential candidate Norman Thomas

Saturday, June 06, 2015

If chicken-shit Iraqi's won't fight for their own country, why should we?

It is well known by now that the Iraqi army is comprised of cowards, and it doesn't speak well of US trainers that we spent the last 12 years training and equipping them to be a competent military, yet at the first sign of trouble from ISIS rabble, they drop their weapons and run away. How did we not know that?

It's being reported today that in addition to advanced US weaponry now in the hands of ISIS, they also have taken control of as many as 2,000 Humvee's. So now not only is ISIS well armed, they are highly mobile too.

Way to go US! Why did we leave 2,000 Humvee's for the Iraqi army anyway? Probably for the same reason we invade third-world cesspools every 10 years or so, to get rid of aging ordinance, to field-test new weapons systems, and to keep our defense contractors at home flush with taxpayer money.....money that politicians know will somehow find its way into their re-election campaign chests.

I realize not all politicians are that corrupt and many naively believe that we are doing some good, but other than the time we liberated under-achieving medical students from thugs in Grenada, when has it ever worked out that way? 


Bill said...

Bill sighs......

Here's the Cliff's Notes: We left a stable situation in 2011, but forfeited all our influence by Obama fulfilling his ideological need to end "Bush's War" and damn the consequences. Sectarian Shiite PM Al-Maliki - after we turned a blind eye to his fraudulent election - purged the Sunnis we had trained in the army, quit paying the Sunni militias from the Anwar Uprising, and filed bogus charges against the Sunnis in his government. He screwed over the Kurds. We had zero influence while Iran waxed strong. Obama wants to make nice with Iran, remember.

Now, 4 years later we find ourselves putting Humpty Dumpty back together. It's not going well.

We should - at minimum - send weapons directly to the valiant Kurds (who are sheltering the few Christians) and continue to try and rebuild the army while killing as many Daesh as we can from the air. Ceding that country to Daesh doesn't bear contemplating.

But, what do I know?

Isaac A. Nussbaum said...

If chicken-shit Iraqi's won't fight for their own country, why should we?

The U.S.-led destruction of Iraq was FOR Iraq? With friends like that who needs enemies?

Ed said...

Bill, I guess I could get behind forcible regime change in these countries, but only if the stable government with which we replace the despotic one, is able to be independant of us in short order. If the secterian situation in Iraq is as convoluted as you describe, did we ever have a chance of leaving them to their own devices in the knowledge that they are better off?

I mean don't we still represent a peace-keeping hammer in Kosovo, now 13 years later? Can we really call that an accomplishment?

What's the solution in Iraq if not Balkanization and if that's the answer, won't Iran swallow up each the minute we leave.....AND did we not forsee that eventuality the day we invaded Iraq to depose Saddam? If not, why not?

Bill said...

The people who haven't been killed or maimed in Kosovo might consider it an accomplishment.

If the WW1 allies had faced up to Hitler in 1937, and if he'd been deposed in a coup, would anyone today say, "Thank God for Churchill's foresight in preventing WW2 and the Holocaust"? No, it would be forgotten.

Who knows or could ever know what Saddam would have done over the past 12 years in power?

Oh, and the people of South Korea might think that inconclusive war was something.

Isaac A. Nussbaum said...

I’m a big fan of Laurence M. Vance. Here are excerpts from his “Serving Two Masters” article that relate to the subject at hand. (Emphasis, mine.)

“John McDougall is a captain in the U.S. Army. He is an ordained minister. He is a chaplain stationed at Joint Base Lewis-McChord near Tacoma, Washington. He is a veteran of both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. He is a West Point graduate. He holds a degree in mechanical engineering. He also holds a Master of Divinity degree. He “served” over 10 years in Airborne and Ranger assignments. He made more than sixty-five parachute jumps into seven countries on four continents.

“He told Army Rangers at a recent 2nd Battalion, 75th Ranger Regiment award ceremony that they were being used by God 'to fulfill the mission on earth to rid the world of evil.'

“There is just one problem with McDougall’s thesis: It is blasphemy to compare the Lord Jesus Christ to an Airborne Ranger. He did good, they do evil. He was holy, they act unholy. He was just, they commit unjust deeds. He was on mission from God, they are on a mission from the U.S. government.”

(source: https://www.lewrockwell.com/2015/06/laurence-m-vance/serving-2-masters/)

Ed said...

Sure, we can go around policing which ever basket-case nation has a dictator with whom we aren't currently allies, but at what cost to taxpayers?

And do you really think it's wise politics to maintain a permanent military presence in all these countries where all the people there really want to do is get back to killing each other? I mean it's noble and all that to rid a country of a tyrannical dictator, but you have to have an exit strategy, a puppet dictator, or something other than sitting around being targets, when the fighting's over.

And I'm fairly sure the South Koreans can handle themselves against the Norks at this point. Besides, if the Norks came south, we could be there before they came out of the DMZ bushes, if they needed us to.