Iraq Is Burning
Again. Or, really, it never stopped burning and now there is gas on the fire. You already know that Iraq is under siege, this time by a group called ISIS, which seems to be a coalition of Sunni forces, Baathists, remnants of Al Queda in Iraq, Syrian and other foreign fighters. ISIS has been capturing territory with some ease, and the Kurds are using the chaos to grab back some land they’ve been claiming. Back home, this has been one more occasion for the GOP to rattle their sabers — calling for action in a country who has had plenty of US action. President Obama has said the usual “all options are on the table” except right now it doesn’t look like boots on the ground is an option.
The Guardian has had the best coverage (to me) of the newest episodes of violence in Iraq. And this one piece of reporting is the showstopper:
Iraqi officials told the Guardian that two divisions of Iraqi soldiers – roughly 30,000 men – simply turned and ran in the face of the assault by an insurgent force of just 800 fighters. Isis extremists roamed freely on Wednesday through the streets of Mosul, openly surprised at the ease with which they took Iraq’s second largest city after three days of sporadic fighting.
Right? Go read the rest — they’ve easily captured weapons, humvees and other equipment we supplied to the Iraqi army (on their way to Syria, certainly) and who knows what else. The Iraqi army that we spent so much money in training and equipping just melted away in the face of a force that the Iraqi army vastly outnumbered. I heard a report on The World this evening where the reporter noted that NO ONE she had talked too that day was calling for any US intervention or even help. Apparently they know what that looks like and don’t want more.
Which is fine by me, really. We never had a good reason to be there in the first place. And not it looks like the strongman that the US backed just continued to destabilize his country to the point here even his army isn’t interested. Oil markets are starting to get jittery which is no reason for American resources to intervene again over here. President Obama talked about there needing to be a political solution in Iraq which struck me as — how many years? — too late. The GOP calling for an intervention here is a genuine disgrace, though. We did Iraq the way they wanted for years and it was a mess when BushCo left office. The US getting out of Iraq was always about cutting losses and it is time to live with that.
Tags: Iraq
We just spent billions on a huge embassy complex that we’ll be pulling out of when these guys reach Baghdad. And Dick Cheney still says that they did everything right and would do it all again.
I just love all these pundits and Republicans saying that we have to do something.
No, we really don’t. First, the Iraqis wanted us out. So we left. And we were happy to leave. Second, they, the Iraqis, don’t want to fight for themselves. 30,000 Iraqi soldiers ran like little fucking cowards in Mosul instead of fighting. So why the hell should we Americans fight for Iraq when Iraq does not want to fight for Iraq?
That Iraq was going to fall into a sectarian civil war has been predicted since 1991. It was inevitable. There is nothing we can do to stop it. We can only contain the damage.
We just spent billions on a huge embassy complex that we’ll be pulling out of when these guys reach Baghdad.
I’m now thinking we built it so we would have a staging ground for a shot of the last helicopters pulling out that we could use to bookend the same photos from Saigon.
In fairness, Iraq wouldn’t be as much of a mess were it not for the US (nevermind that the idiots that committed the original sin are out of power). I don’t think that we can intervene in any way, shape or form, but we in America will have blood on our hands when the end comes for Iraq.
Thanks Bush/Cheney!
By the way, there are plenty of people out there that would have elected Bush/Cheney again if it were possible. We ought to airlift all vehicles that still have Bush Cheney 2004 bumper stickers on them (along with their occupants) over to Iraq for the siege of Baghdad that is certainly coming soon.
If you are an Iraqi Sunni zealot who always longed for an Islamic state, you have to regard Bush/Cheney as a gift from Allah.
Does any of this look/sound familiar?
Is there any of it that doesn’t sound familiar? It is a straight-up remake. South Viet Nam Army had 750,000 men under arms in 1975 but could only muster 110,000 in Saigon for a last stand. Our phony propped up governments don’t last long when we stop propping them up.
The U.S. is certainly hugely complicit for the mess in Iraq, but look further into history.
Britain, the British Empire basically drew the boundaries for most of the states comprising the contemporary middle east post Ottoman Empire. This done apparently with little regard for tribal and family affiliations so important to that ancient culture, resulting in an “unnatural” composition of borders and countries. So, Brits, own up to this man made catastrophe and this time, just stay out of it or you’ll screw it up again.
I blame Obama.
They’ve been emboldened by Benghazi.
If we don’t fight them over there, we’ll have to fight them over here.
What is this cliche hour?
Hearts and Minds.
We are spreading freedom!
Greeted as liberators.
I should add to my post above that the Brits also totally overlooked sectarian loyalties and animosities in their creation of the fictional middle east country borders.
Whats that? They have taken the oil fields?
And………we’re back in Iraq.
Come on, Geezer, you forgot one: They hate us for our freedom.
The Brits purposely created false borders to prevent any strong national unity movements.
Do we want the smoking gun to come in the form of a mushroom cloud?
If we intervene, we can pay for it with Iraqi oil revenues.
“There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don’t know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don’t know we don’t know.”
Tom M: If avoiding national unity in their border drawing was the Brits. strategy, they sure then succeeded, didn’t they, but to the detriment of potential democracy and any kind of peaceful internal governance it would appear, would it not? Now the western world joins in the suffering.
Arm everyone.
The only way to stop a bad Iraqi is an even badder Iraqi with a gun. Who knew the NRA logic finally makes sense.
Should’ve left Saddam in there. He was a Sunni anyway, and the nation had stability. Now they’ll be Sunni again with orthodox Islamic Law. Never a friendly sign for Westerners.
I think they’re in the last throes, if you will, of the insurgency.
We just need one more surge because…”…unified, democratic federal Iraq that can govern itself, defend itself, and sustain itself, and is an ally in the War on Terror.”
Or something.
We have reached a turning point in the struggle between freedom and terror.
Military force is off the table so I guess we will have to limit ourselves to bombarding them again with pallets of cash.
Mission Accomplished
Apparently no one is surprised, John McCain excepted. As noted the Iraqi army is no army at all, billions in equipment and training prove worthless yet again. But this time, old war lovers ranting and screaming or not, the American people will not stand for “boots on the ground” nor endless wasted billions in “aid”. We, as a nation, are essentially back to where we started at the end of Viet Nam. So say it with me: No More War. That and I could give a damn if it all goes south.
So… What was the point of the $2 trillion US war with thousands killed?
When the outcome was so obvious, why did we spend that money and all those lives…. Oh yea… This military contractors donated a whole heap of money to politicians.
How about a new rule… If you take taxpayer dollars, then you can’t use those dollars to buy politicians. When that happens in other countries, we call it a kickback.
People seem to forget that Obama took the credit for a successful end to the Iraq war.
Obama took credit for ending the US’ combat mission. He told the troops that they had successfully completed their mission.
If by “taking credit” you mean seeing the United State abides by the agreement GW Bush signed in 2008, then YES.
“As a candidate for president, I pledged to bring the war in Iraq to a responsible end ”
“Shortly after taking office, I announced our new strategy for Iraq and for a transition to full Iraqi responsibility.
“And I made it clear that by August 31st, 2010, America’s combat mission in Iraq would end,
What was that you said, SussexAnon?
“Charlie Pierce writes about this new bit of GOP saber-rattling in a piece that I wish I could repost in it’s entirety:
It was brought to a responsible end. Are you of the delusion that, once propped up by the US, an inept foreign government either stands forever or this country takes the blame?
And Ari Fleischer can’t remember when the Iraq Surge happens.
Right? These people were only in it to get their own Faulkands glow.
@G “It was brought to a responsible end.”
Exactly.
Hey fbh… Whose sons and daughters do you want to still be dying in Iraq?
If al-Maliki had included more Kurdish and Sunni leaders in his government, this wouldn’t be happening. But by imposing a hard pro-Shiite sectarian government rule, this result became rather obvious.
There’s no way that the US should send anything. Why reward incompetence?
I don’t care at this point why we went there, or who profited, or what the Iraqi government we left in place could have done better. I can’t go back and change or even influence those things. (And if you think that’s easy to say, please consider that I lost 17 friends and former fellow service members in that war.)
What I can say is this: there is little valid US national interest in who controls Iraq from this point forward. The region has been habitually unstable for decades, and the only entities profiting from continued US military presence in the Arabian Gulf and the surrounding Gulf States are are large corporations; European nations whose oil lifelines we are safeguarding; Al Qaeda (for whom our presence is a magnificent recruiting tool); and Saudi Arabia, a country we keep propping up as critical to our interests. The idea of an ISIS-controlled Iraq and Syria being worse that a Saddam-controlled Iraq and an Assad-controlled Syria doesn’t stand up to even minimal scrutiny. ISIS can’t run, pacify, or unite the country any more effectively than we did.
In the meantime we have lost thousands of American lives, created tens of thousands of severely wounded vets we don’t take care of, wrecked our economy via military spending, and placed political power in the hands of a self-perpetuating corporate elite that’s thrilled to let us all argue over the bones while they carve up the meat.
If China or Russia or Europe wants to take over the mantle of “world’s dumbest superpower trying to patrol the Middle East,” let them spend their own blood and treasure. It’s time to shut the book on this strategic misadventure and the politicians who keep wanting to get different results by doing the same things over and over again.
Interesting read on what went down.
Apparently the Iraqis liked Obamas timetable to exit idea in the bilateral negotiations in 2008 and Bush signed on.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/26/obama-iraq_n_1032507.html
“Hey fbh… Whose sons and daughters do you want to still be dying in Iraq?”
None, and I don’t want them dying in Afghanistan either.
I’ve always been against both of those “wars”
The Obama administration did join in taking credit for successful nation building in Iraq though.
@fhb “I’ve always been against both of those “wars””
Sorry… I took your previous comment:
“People seem to forget that Obama took the credit for a successful end to the Iraq war.”
…as a complaint about Obama. I guess you were congratulating him instead.
Tom Ricks wonders why everyone is surprised:
Here’s another lesson. Don’t create puppet governments that are going to go full sectarian the minute you leave.