CDZ We Bet On The Wrong Horse Again

[Zander]

Pat Buchanan :

In almost all of the wars in which we have been engaged, those we back have superior training, weapons, and numbers. Yet, for whatever makes men willing to fight and die, or volunteer for martyrdom, the Islamic State, al-Qaeda, and the Taliban have found the formula, while our allies have not. To be a martyr for Allah, to create a new caliphate, to expel the infidels and their puppets, these are causes Islamic man will die for. This is what ISIS has on offer. And the offer is finding buyers even in the West.


What do we have on offer? What do we have to persuade Iraqi Sunnis to fight to return their Anbar homeland to the Iranian-backed Shiite regime in Baghdad? Of our Arab allies, the Qataris, Saudis, and Gulf Arabs are willing to do air strikes. And the Kurds will fight—for Kurdistan.


But if the future belongs to those willing to fight and die for it, or to volunteer to become martyrs, the future of the Middle East would seem fated to be decided by Sunni tribesmen, Shiite militia, ISIS and al-Qaeda, Hezbollah, and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard.


In the Middle East, the time of the True Believers appears at hand.

Why American Allies Won t Fight The American Conservative

 

[Liminal]

Pat Buchanan :

In almost all of the wars in which we have been engaged, those we back have superior training, weapons, and numbers. Yet, for whatever makes men willing to fight and die, or volunteer for martyrdom, the Islamic State, al-Qaeda, and the Taliban have found the formula, while our allies have not. To be a martyr for Allah, to create a new caliphate, to expel the infidels and their puppets, these are causes Islamic man will die for. This is what ISIS has on offer. And the offer is finding buyers even in the West.


What do we have on offer? What do we have to persuade Iraqi Sunnis to fight to return their Anbar homeland to the Iranian-backed Shiite regime in Baghdad? Of our Arab allies, the Qataris, Saudis, and Gulf Arabs are willing to do air strikes. And the Kurds will fight—for Kurdistan.


But if the future belongs to those willing to fight and die for it, or to volunteer to become martyrs, the future of the Middle East would seem fated to be decided by Sunni tribesmen, Shiite militia, ISIS and al-Qaeda, Hezbollah, and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard.


In the Middle East, the time of the True Believers appears at hand.

Why American Allies Won t Fight The American Conservative

We should have learned this lesson before. You can't make people want to fight if they don't believe they're fighting for something important. The Viet Cong and North Vietnamese believed in what they were doing, while the South Vietnamese had no confidence in their corrupt government or ineffectual army. The same is true in Iraq today, the ISIS fighters are committed, the Iraqi government soldiers won't fight. ISIS has suicide bombers as committed as any Kamikazi, Iraq has demoralized and poorly led troops, about as committed as Italians in North Africa in 1943. Not even that effective really. Iraqi Army units holding a ten to one advantage over ISIS fighters have run away without putting up any resistance at all. They aren't even as good as the South Vietnamese in 1975.

 

[Dot Com]

Betting that Obama would back the USA instead of Jihad was a losing bet

You guys are just silly, not even capable of an actual adult discussion.

Obama switched sides. We had Ramadi secured, at great cost and Obama decided to turn it over to ISIS and Al Qaeda

It must be very liberating to have such an uncomplicated view of the world.

Thats our CrusaderFrank

 

[Dot Com]

You guys are just silly, not even capable of an actual adult discussion.

Obama switched sides. We had Ramadi secured, at great cost and Obama decided to turn it over to ISIS and Al Qaeda

It must be very liberating to have such an uncomplicated view of the world.

We had Al Qaeda defeat in Al Anbar, then Obama decided to desert our friends and allies, leaving a vacuum to let ISIS and AQ back it. The only question is, is Obama stupid or working with AQ?

The good folks of the Bush Administration agreed with you. They thought we should occupy Iraq indefinitely.

They knew how to suppress AQ and they did it. Why did Obama take the pressure off if AQ? The bad guys have RPGs and mortars, the Iraqi citizens, not so much. It takes 15 years before the us army will give a commander his own division. That's the level of training we require, that's at least what we should have had in Iraq.

The worst part is how the USA now looks unreliable and undependable, run by a pathological lair and possible Jihad supporter. That's the worst of it

NEWSFLASH!!! There were no AQ in Iraq prior to the *cough* shock & awe" ad campaign

 

[Dot Com]

Obama damaged both the Middle East and the Untied States reputation

lol. You're funny The President got our kids out of that circular firing squad Frankie on his Repub predecessor's timeline.

why do you lie?.

No, your President threw again the peace and stability bought at much cost in Iraq.

I would post the Battle of Ramadi again, where they declared "AQ is defeated in Al Anbar" but it won't make a difference because you worship Obama as a deity

if "keeping a lid on it" = "peace & stability" in your rw world. The sooner we got our people outta that money pit, the better.

The ONLY people who profited from that 10 yr duration, money pit/quagmire were Iran, Russia, China, U.S. defense contractors (as if they need more taxpayer $$$) & mercs.

Hows that good for America?.

 

[Dot Com]

Pat Buchanan :

In almost all of the wars in which we have been engaged, those we back have superior training, weapons, and numbers. Yet, for whatever makes men willing to fight and die, or volunteer for martyrdom, the Islamic State, al-Qaeda, and the Taliban have found the formula, while our allies have not. To be a martyr for Allah, to create a new caliphate, to expel the infidels and their puppets, these are causes Islamic man will die for. This is what ISIS has on offer. And the offer is finding buyers even in the West.


What do we have on offer? What do we have to persuade Iraqi Sunnis to fight to return their Anbar homeland to the Iranian-backed Shiite regime in Baghdad? Of our Arab allies, the Qataris, Saudis, and Gulf Arabs are willing to do air strikes. And the Kurds will fight—for Kurdistan.


But if the future belongs to those willing to fight and die for it, or to volunteer to become martyrs, the future of the Middle East would seem fated to be decided by Sunni tribesmen, Shiite militia, ISIS and al-Qaeda, Hezbollah, and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard.


In the Middle East, the time of the True Believers appears at hand.

Why American Allies Won t Fight The American Conservative

yep

Their religion means more to them than their national identity. Malaki proved that by alienating a large swath of the population- Sunnis that didn't share his religious sect. Malaki was endorsed by our previous Repub President & Cheney the whole time. Bad move on the Repubs part

 

[Brian Nott]

The United States of America can bring it's might to bear, we can pour in billions of dollars, men, training, and equipment, we can provide our allies with all the tools of war. Yet none of that matters when people won't stand and fight for themselves.

Our problem is the West tries to spread its democratic mentality upon the whole world despite whether the rest world likes it or not but it's well known that the East differs from us greatly and our life values seem not to match the eastern ones so we'll never find strong support in the Middle East or in Asian I suppose.

 

[Brian Nott]

Obama switched sides. We had Ramadi secured, at great cost and Obama decided to turn it over to ISIS and Al Qaeda

It must be very liberating to have such an uncomplicated view of the world.

We had Al Qaeda defeat in Al Anbar, then Obama decided to desert our friends and allies, leaving a vacuum to let ISIS and AQ back it. The only question is, is Obama stupid or working with AQ?

The good folks of the Bush Administration agreed with you. They thought we should occupy Iraq indefinitely.

They knew how to suppress AQ and they did it. Why did Obama take the pressure off if AQ? The bad guys have RPGs and mortars, the Iraqi citizens, not so much. It takes 15 years before the us army will give a commander his own division. That's the level of training we require, that's at least what we should have had in Iraq.

The worst part is how the USA now looks unreliable and undependable, run by a pathological lair and possible Jihad supporter. That's the worst of it

You obviously don't know much about building an army. It may only take fifteen years to train a division commander, but it takes a lot longer to change a culture. What about unit pride, history and esprit de corps? An army need a lot more than a few years of training to become an effective force. And when you have an army that supports ethnic and religious conflict, you don't really have a national army. The Iraq Army is just another Shiite militia.

Besides I think any of eastern armies than many years of training or the most advanced ammunition need a strong leader to be ordered and to follow especially when there was such a commander in the previous years.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

We had Al Qaeda defeat in Al Anbar, then Obama decided to desert our friends and allies, leaving a vacuum to let ISIS and AQ back it. The only question is, is Obama stupid or working with AQ?

The good folks of the Bush Administration agreed with you. They thought we should occupy Iraq indefinitely.

They knew how to suppress AQ and they did it. Why did Obama take the pressure off if AQ? The bad guys have RPGs and mortars, the Iraqi citizens, not so much. It takes 15 years before the us army will give a commander his own division. That's the level of training we require, that's at least what we should have had in Iraq.

The worst part is how the USA now looks unreliable and undependable, run by a pathological lair and possible Jihad supporter. That's the worst of it

You obviously don't know much about building an army. It may only take fifteen years to train a division commander, but it takes a lot longer to change a culture. What about unit pride, history and esprit de corps? An army need a lot more than a few years of training to become an effective force. And when you have an army that supports ethnic and religious conflict, you don't really have a national army. The Iraq Army is just another Shiite militia.

OMFG!!! That's my EXACT POINT!!!!

Thank you!

You walked right into it!!

We were off to a good start with the ISF, until Obama pulled the plug

We were never off to a good start in Iraq, and we never will be.

AQ was DEFEATED in Al Anbar providence.

DEFEATED

By US and Iraqi forces, with US doing most of the heavy lifting.

You don't get to make up your own facts and here's your cue to say, "but Boooooosh"

 

[Liminal]

The good folks of the Bush Administration agreed with you. They thought we should occupy Iraq indefinitely.

They knew how to suppress AQ and they did it. Why did Obama take the pressure off if AQ? The bad guys have RPGs and mortars, the Iraqi citizens, not so much. It takes 15 years before the us army will give a commander his own division. That's the level of training we require, that's at least what we should have had in Iraq.

The worst part is how the USA now looks unreliable and undependable, run by a pathological lair and possible Jihad supporter. That's the worst of it

You obviously don't know much about building an army. It may only take fifteen years to train a division commander, but it takes a lot longer to change a culture. What about unit pride, history and esprit de corps? An army need a lot more than a few years of training to become an effective force. And when you have an army that supports ethnic and religious conflict, you don't really have a national army. The Iraq Army is just another Shiite militia.

OMFG!!! That's my EXACT POINT!!!!

Thank you!

You walked right into it!!

We were off to a good start with the ISF, until Obama pulled the plug

We were never off to a good start in Iraq, and we never will be.

AQ was DEFEATED in Al Anbar providence.

DEFEATED

By US and Iraqi forces, with US doing most of the heavy lifting.

You don't get to make up your own facts and here's your cue to say, "but Boooooosh"

Defeating terrorists doesn't build a nation or an army. You need a lot more than that to claim success.

 

[Liminal]

Obama damaged both the Middle East and the Untied States reputation

lol. You're funny The President got our kids out of that circular firing squad Frankie on his Repub predecessor's timeline.

why do you lie?.

No, your President threw again the peace and stability bought at much cost in Iraq.

I would post the Battle of Ramadi again, where they declared "AQ is defeated in Al Anbar" but it won't make a difference because you worship Obama as a deity

I'm not the least bit interested in having my son go back for a fourth trip to Iraq. How about you? What are you willing to sacrifice?

 

[Dot Com]

Obama damaged both the Middle East and the Untied States reputation

lol. You're funny The President got our kids out of that circular firing squad Frankie on his Repub predecessor's timeline.

why do you lie?.

No, your President threw again the peace and stability bought at much cost in Iraq.

I would post the Battle of Ramadi again, where they declared "AQ is defeated in Al Anbar" but it won't make a difference because you worship Obama as a deity

I'm not the least bit interested in having my son go back for a fourth trip to Iraq. How about you? What are you willing to sacrifice?

Where did your son serve?

Nice dodge.

I'll ask: who is going to pay for you types to fight other people's wars and who are you going to send to fight the roadside bombs 57Frank?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Obama damaged both the Middle East and the Untied States reputation

lol. You're funny The President got our kids out of that circular firing squad Frankie on his Repub predecessor's timeline.

why do you lie?.

No, your President threw again the peace and stability bought at much cost in Iraq.

I would post the Battle of Ramadi again, where they declared "AQ is defeated in Al Anbar" but it won't make a difference because you worship Obama as a deity

I'm not the least bit interested in having my son go back for a fourth trip to Iraq. How about you? What are you willing to sacrifice?

Where did your son serve?

Nice dodge.

I'll ask: who is going to pay for you types to fight other people's wars and who are you going to send to fight the roadside bombs 57Frank?

We're already paying the soldiers, right?

Right or wrong, we decided as a nation to invade Iraq.

We subdued AQ and Insurgents, right?

Why did we then decide to throw that all away?

 

[Dot Com]

lol. You're funny The President got our kids out of that circular firing squad Frankie on his Repub predecessor's timeline.

why do you lie?.

No, your President threw again the peace and stability bought at much cost in Iraq.

I would post the Battle of Ramadi again, where they declared "AQ is defeated in Al Anbar" but it won't make a difference because you worship Obama as a deity

I'm not the least bit interested in having my son go back for a fourth trip to Iraq. How about you? What are you willing to sacrifice?

Where did your son serve?

Nice dodge.

I'll ask: who is going to pay for you types to fight other people's wars and who are you going to send to fight the roadside bombs 57Frank?

We're already paying the soldiers, right?

Right or wrong, we decided as a nation to invade Iraq.

We subdued AQ and Insurgents, right?

Why did we then decide to throw that all away?

except that they don't get deployment and hazardous duty pay when they're here 57Frank. PLUS, they don't suffer TBI or lose limbs, which also gets billed to the taxpayers, to roadside bombs if they're here in the homeland. I thought you implied that you served?

 

[Dot Com]

lol. You're funny The President got our kids out of that circular firing squad Frankie on his Repub predecessor's timeline.

why do you lie?.

No, your President threw again the peace and stability bought at much cost in Iraq.

I would post the Battle of Ramadi again, where they declared "AQ is defeated in Al Anbar" but it won't make a difference because you worship Obama as a deity

I'm not the least bit interested in having my son go back for a fourth trip to Iraq. How about you? What are you willing to sacrifice?

Where did your son serve?

Nice dodge.

I'll ask: who is going to pay for you types to fight other people's wars and who are you going to send to fight the roadside bombs 57Frank?

We're already paying the soldiers, right?

Right or wrong, we decided as a nation to invade Iraq.

We subdued AQ and Insurgents, right?

Why did we then decide to throw that all away?

there were no AQ in Iraq prior to the invasion. SH was a secular socialist. He didn't like AQ. I told you this ystrdy

No wonder Repubs are so clueless when it comes to foreign policy.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The OP is correct, we did bet on the wrong horse: Barack Obama.

Bush and Condi left it up to their successor to negotiate the status of forces in Iraq. They wanted the successor to form his own strategy on how best to work with Iraqis. What no one thought possible, was that we'd have a President who would switch sides and work with the Jihadists, giving them perfect conditions to win back the land and take away the stability we were able to bring to the region.

It's a shame on the USA. It's not just that we look weak, it's worse, we're undependable and will throw our support in with the foices of evil

 

[CrusaderFrank]

No, your President threw again the peace and stability bought at much cost in Iraq.

I would post the Battle of Ramadi again, where they declared "AQ is defeated in Al Anbar" but it won't make a difference because you worship Obama as a deity

I'm not the least bit interested in having my son go back for a fourth trip to Iraq. How about you? What are you willing to sacrifice?

Where did your son serve?

Nice dodge.

I'll ask: who is going to pay for you types to fight other people's wars and who are you going to send to fight the roadside bombs 57Frank?

We're already paying the soldiers, right?

Right or wrong, we decided as a nation to invade Iraq.

We subdued AQ and Insurgents, right?

Why did we then decide to throw that all away?

except that they don't get deployment and hazardousduty pay when thery're here 57Frank. PLUS, they don't suffer TBI or lose limbs, which also gets billed to the taxpayers, to roadside bombs if they're here in the homeland. I thought you implied that you served?

I never implied that, I don't know where you got that idea.

I wonder how the soldiers feel about Obama switching sides and throwing away all their hard work and sacrifice

 

[Dot Com]

"keeping a lid on it" (to the tune of $2BILLION/week in borrowed taxpayer $$$ [from the Chinese I might add]) is not a good "strategy" 57Frank.

Best to leave foreign policy decisions to our two-term, Democratic President.

People need to fight AND PAY FOR their own religious civil wars.

 

[Dot Com]

I'm not the least bit interested in having my son go back for a fourth trip to Iraq. How about you? What are you willing to sacrifice?

Where did your son serve?

Nice dodge.

I'll ask: who is going to pay for you types to fight other people's wars and who are you going to send to fight the roadside bombs 57Frank?

We're already paying the soldiers, right?

Right or wrong, we decided as a nation to invade Iraq.

We subdued AQ and Insurgents, right?

Why did we then decide to throw that all away?

except that they don't get deployment and hazardousduty pay when thery're here 57Frank. PLUS, they don't suffer TBI or lose limbs, which also gets billed to the taxpayers, to roadside bombs if they're here in the homeland. I thought you implied that you served?

I never implied that, I don't know where you got that idea.

I wonder how the soldiers feel about Obama switching sides and throwing away all their hard work and sacrifice

I don't think many soldiers miss endless deployments away from their families in a muslim country where alcohol is not served, the facilities built by the likes of Halliburton are sub-standard at best (taxpayers over-billed for it too ) and its 100 degrees in the shade. You?

When I served, that would not be my first preference for a duty station

 

[CrusaderFrank]

We had Al Qaeda defeat in Al Anbar, then Obama decided to desert our friends and allies, leaving a vacuum to let ISIS and AQ back it. The only question is, is Obama stupid or working with AQ?

The good folks of the Bush Administration agreed with you. They thought we should occupy Iraq indefinitely.

They knew how to suppress AQ and they did it. Why did Obama take the pressure off if AQ? The bad guys have RPGs and mortars, the Iraqi citizens, not so much. It takes 15 years before the us army will give a commander his own division. That's the level of training we require, that's at least what we should have had in Iraq.

The worst part is how the USA now looks unreliable and undependable, run by a pathological lair and possible Jihad supporter. That's the worst of it

CF one can't even begin to list 1600's fuck ups over Iraq and ISIS. It's unreal.

Some days I actually want to think that Obama wanted this to happen because then it would be a success for him because surely no one would fuck up this bad.

It comes down to Obama either being very stupid or supporting Jihad.

I like my analogy of the NYC Mayor disbanding the Police Force declaring Victory on Crime after a murder free week, it's precisely what Obama did in Iraq

how many years did you serve in Iraq Frank? Whose kids do you want to be on endless deployment using borrowed taxpayer $$$ (borrowed from the Chinese I might add)

Ever hear the phrase "throwing good money after bad"? Thats what the endless occupation of the sandbox was doing.

We're fighting an endless Democrat "War on Poverty" What's the exit strategy?

We still have troops in Germany and Japan? That war ended 70 years ago!