Is Iraq heating back up?

[Chucktshoes]

 I don't know about any one else but I am getting sick and tired of our Government sticking our noses in issues regarding other peoples problems. People keep talking about freedom. Back in the beginning when the Americans held the Boston Tea Party in the Boston Harbor it was the beginning of our reach for Freedom. Out numbered and far out gunned a determined group of Freedom loving people told the King and Queen of England to kiss their butts and what they could do with their taxes. Way I see it these third world country's seeking freedom can earn theirs the same way we won ours. They can fight for it and if they want it bad enough they will win the fight. Some people call them Civil Wars, other people call the religious wars. We had our Civil war also and I didn't see any other countries rushing over to help fight in ours. We settled it and the nation became one again. I say we quit volunteering to help every that asks for help and say NO!!! If you want it fight for it or live under the oppression you live under now. When we left Iraq they were a free and independent country. 4000 Americans died and thousands more injured and maimed for life giving the that freedom and now they are screaming and begging us to come back and help them again. I say NO NO NO and 1 more NO!!!!! If they want it bad enough they will find a way to get it. If they want someone else to come and do the dirty work for them again and lose more American lives the answer needs to be NO!!! Freedom is not free and if we keep fighting and dying for a country we earned the freedom for once and go back again they will never stand on their own. South Korea is a good example of that. We fought to keep them and we have had to have a standing army presence there ever since. I say not again anywhere except Israel. We stand with Israel which is the only country over there we could depend on to fight for us and I guess that is probably why our President resents them so much..........................jmho

Point of correction. The French were instrumental in providing support to the colonists in their fight. The likelyhood of success without that help would have been very slim. Much of the help was provided through unofficial back channels as overt help from the French Monarchy would have cause full out war with England. Still, the French used the 1st American War of Independence as a proxy war against England much the same way we armed and assisted the Mujihadeen in Afghanistan against the Russians.

Edited June 13, 2014 by Chucktshoes

[tnhawk]

I needed good laugh today and that was it.................... :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rock: :rock:

I started to laugh, but it blew out the other end.

[btq96r]

 I say not again anywhere except Israel. We stand with Israel which is the only country over there we could depend on to fight for us and I guess that is probably why our President resents them so much..........................jmho

 

Not for nothing, but I wouldn't depend on Israel to do anything for us "just because."  Their interests and ours don't always align and they are not opposed to doing things that we disagree with or things that could be considered breaches of our alliance with them.  They will spy on us without shame (we do it too admittedly) and will sell to China the mil tech we share with them to maintain their quantitative military edge over any other state in the region.  I wouldn't depend on them for anything critical and would treat them with an entire shaker of salt in dealings.

 

 

As far as the current mess in Iraq goes, this is all on Nouri al-Malaki.  He openly went after Sunni members of the government (Vice President, Finance MInister) and pretty much refused to integrate Sunni interests into the political process of Iraq.  He's reaping what he sowed in the traditional style of the Middle East; through violent action.  The only way to avoid this would have been to keep tens of thousands of our troops in Iraq for at least a generation or two, and that just isn't worth it to me.  At this point, breaking up Iraq into three states (Sunni, Shia and Kurdish) may be the best option for stability.  I'd support it for a Kurdish region tomorrow and give a hard look at two other states popping up form new Sunni and Shia countries, even knowing the Shia one would be under de-facto Iranian control by the end of the week.

[tnhawk]

One of the few things I've learned about the French is don't follow them unless you are looking for weapons in like new condition.  Going to Vietnam after them didn't seem to work well for us.

[TMF]

[quote name="btq96r" post="1158534" timestamp="1402680383"]...even knowing the Shia one would be under de-facto Iranian control by the end of the week.[/quote] Right now Iran is salivating over Basra like a high school quarterback on a ruphied cheerleader. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bersaguy]

One of the few things I've learned about the French is don't follow them unless you are looking for weapons in like new condition.  Going to Vietnam after them didn't seem to work well for us.

Lets face it. The French have never had the stomach for fighting a war and doubt they ever will but they do supply arms from time to time so I guess that is something anyway as I learned in one of my previous posts.........jmho

[Grayfox54]

The problem is and always has been that the U.S. government can't or won't accept the simple fact that they are dealing with an entirely different culture. These people have had their own ways of doing things for thousands of years and they won't let go of that no matter how hard anybody tries. The U.S. government seems hell bent on forcing our form of democracy on people who have absolutely no concept of it nor do they want to learn. Not only does forced intervention not work, it makes them hate us for it.

I say leave 'em alone. Let them sort it all out on their own and in their own way. Once its all said and done, then we need to find a way to peacefully deal with whoever is left. 

[Hershmeister]

More proof that O is tied with the islamists: "Instead, the White House is conditioning 'any commitment of military resources or a military operation' on an agreement from Iraqi leaders to commit 'to pursue an inclusive, political agenda' with Sunni Islamists who are terrorizing their cities." Obama rules OUT sending troops back into combat in Iraq but promises to review military options | Mail Online http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2657229/U-S-launch-airstrikes-against-Iraqi-terrorist-army-warplanes-drones-24-hours-notice-doesnt-need-permission-Congress.html

[Sam1]

Heard some folks talking about several Iraqi cities falling back into the hands of extremists. Looks like things are NOT getting any better over there.

 

http://online.wsj.com/articles/iraqi-drama-catches-u-s-off-guard-1402529874

 

http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/12/world/meast/iraq-violence/

 

http://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2014/06/12/obama-iraq-will-need-additional-us-assistance

 

Iraq is not heating back up, it never cooled off.  Both of these administrations has completely failed at dealing with the fact that these people have been fighting for thousands of years and we are not going to change the culture with diplomacy.

[btq96r]

More proof that O is tied with the islamists: "Instead, the White House is conditioning 'any commitment of military resources or a military operation' on an agreement from Iraqi leaders to commit 'to pursue an inclusive, political agenda' with Sunni Islamists who are terrorizing their cities." Obama rules OUT sending troops back into combat in Iraq but promises to review military options | Mail Online http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2657229/U-S-launch-airstrikes-against-Iraqi-terrorist-army-warplanes-drones-24-hours-notice-doesnt-need-permission-Congress.html

 

How is this "proof that O is tied with the islamists"?  If we're hoping to keep Iraq intact as the borders legally stand now, any democratic government has to inclulde and address the needs of the Sunni minority.  Even as a minority, they're too big to ignore or suppress unless the Shia were willing to keep them under heel like Saddam kept the Shia at bay.  Likewise with the Kurds.

 

I wouldn't be willing to bomb anybody on behalf of al-Malaki's government as it is today.  For my money, the only group worth U.S. intervention to support over there are the Kurds.

[molonlabetn]

There is no country on earth that I would willingly send others to fight and die in, that I wouldn't fight and die for, myself. That said... Iraq is not one of those countries. There are plenty of bad people and bad governments, let the good people there be the first to struggle and if need be ASK for HELP deposing an irrepresentative government. Then, and only then, we choose winnable battles.

We did the opposite. I cannot support conflict which results in thousands of dead American soldiers... Each of whom is testament to the best of humanity in personal sacrifice. But on top of that, their sacrifice is now being nullified because of bureaucratic ineptitude of the ungrateful masses and their pacifist minions.

Fuck Iraq. God bless the selfless souls who have toiled for years to make a difference despite the impossible and disingenuous means afforded them.

Let that place return to dust.

[bersaguy]

Lets face the reality that when Bush removed Saddam Hussein from Iraq he destabilized the entire middle East and he was the only real controlling factor in that whole area. Every country over there was afraid of him and he kept folks in line sorta. Iran would not be building Nukes right now if he was still in control...............jmho

[Oh Shoot]

All is good. We're working with Iran to remedy everything.

 

Right.

 

- OS

[bersaguy]

All is good. We're working with Iran to remedy everything.

 

Right.

 

- OS

RIGHT!!!!!! :rofl: :rofl: :rock:  I guess they are now the ones in control over there now that we removed Saddam for them because they tried and failed several times.............jmho

Edited June 16, 2014 by bersaguy