So what is everyone's thoughts on Obama's plan for ISIS?

[TobiasFunke]

Flop, if you can solve the the differences between the Sunnis and Shia, more power to you. As long as these two hate each other and will do anything to kill one another, doesn't matter how long we stayed in Iraq. It's a futile situation. We did all we could in the end as far as training, arming, spending, spending, spending, and more spending. This was the result. Tens of thousands of Iraqi and foreign terrorists were killed and tens of thousands replaced them. Hundreds of thousands civilians died at the hands of terrorists and the U.S. military. Thousands of U.S. soldiers killed and maimed.

I hate to use this phrase but it is what it is.

Agree 100%

 

There was absolutely nothing else we could have done to stabilize the country more than it was short of occupying the country forever. Nothing.

[mtangelsfan]

I see Iran gave the U.S. the big finger about working with them regarding ISIL. 

 

 

 

 

I don't blame them.

[TobiasFunke]

If it's the inevitable that we are going in there guns blazing, why should Iran spend resources to do the same thing?

 

It's like if I'm gearing up for a fight with some dude and a person I don't really like steps in and says, "hey man, **** that guy I'm gonna kick his ass also." I'd stand back and let them go at it.

[floplag]

Flop, if you can solve the the differences between the Sunnis and Shia, more power to you. As long as these two hate each other and will do anything to kill one another, doesn't matter how long we stayed in Iraq. It's a futile situation. We did all we could in the end as far as training, arming, spending, spending, spending, and more spending. This was the result. Tens of thousands of Iraqi and foreign terrorists were killed and tens of thousands replaced them. Hundreds of thousands civilians died at the hands of terrorists and the U.S. military. Thousands of U.S. soldiers killed and maimed.

I hate to use this phrase but it is what it is.

 

Their hatred of each other and apparently everyone else not part of their movements has nothing to do with anything in this thread.  The point is what we did or didn't do, and what should have been a reasonable expectation based on those actions.

 

Did we do everything we could, debatable...  but lets assume you are right for a moment...  Was this outcome and the current crisis predictable based on those actions, I'd say that's pretty much undeniable at this point.

 

The point isn't even really what else we could have done to help them, but what we perhaps should have done to prevent the current situation from happening, and clearly we didn't do enough in that regard and we are basically right back where we started and a lot of good men died in vain over politics.

[gotbeer]

I think in Iraq it's a bit of too little too late.  The situation in Iraq would probably have been a lot more different if we overthrew the government the first time.  Instead of the invasion, then withdrawal by Bush Sr.  Acutally probably would have received a lot more international support also back then.  

[TobiasFunke]

Was this outcome and the current crisis predictable based on those actions, I'd say that's pretty much undeniable at this point.

 

Bull. The country could have been stable for 10 years, and the second something like this happens you would say that it was because of a power vacuum and our fault that this happened.

 

The point is, short of keeping troops and money in the country for an indefinite time there was nothing else that could have been done.

[floplag]

Bull. The country could have been stable for 10 years, and the second something like this happens you would say that it was because of a power vacuum and our fault that this happened.

 

The point is, short of keeping troops and money in the country for an indefinite time there was nothing else that could have been done.

no, what you just said is bull.

I for one would not have said such a thing 10 years later, it wouldn't be logical, but considering there was really NEVER any kind of stability, yes im saying it now.

and ifthat was the only option, considering we created the situation, perhaps it should have been considered instead of doing what we did for the politics here at home... just sayin.

[Tank]

Should we have left troops, higher presence, whatever.. i don't know the answer to that.   What i know is that we left an incomplete job and a huge power vacuum in a part of the world not known for its reasonable ideologies.  We toppled a regime, and left before anything stable had taken hold, thats incomplete and unfinished.

 

As for what else we could have done, preventing something as predictable as this, should have counted.  Any other specifics are conjecture. 

We didn't leave because the job was done, we left cause it was the popular thing to do stateside.

 

You are asking for specifics like it matters, even the generalities prove the point.  At this point its argumentative, and getting boring.

 

we still have troops in okinawa, south korea, and germany. i'd have been fine if we had left troops in iraq. in the absence of any US presence, ISIS has stepped in to fill what they see as a void. if the US is still there, maybe ISIS stays away.

[Jay]

It was a no-brainer to leave a residual force in Iraq to continue training the Iraqi forces and keep the peace.

 

This was delusional:

 

[TobiasFunke]

When then is the time to take out our soldiers? What decides when the peace is kept?

[Jay]

Take out the soldiers when the country really is sovereign, stable, and self-reliant, not just when it sounds good to say it because you're running for re-election.

[fan_since79]

The only real way to defeat this enemy is to bomb the hell out of them first, then send in a half-million troops to kill or capture anyone still standing. After that, you occupy the country for a few decades. If anyone starts any trouble, you crush them. Rinse, lather, repeat.

 

This is how you win wars against Islamic terrorists like ISIS, not through intermittent, "targeted" airstrikes and special advisors attempting to train soldiers who either hate us, or don't really care about fighting.

 

The first alternative is totally unfeasible, as the American people won't stand for it, and we can't afford it.

 

This is the new reality, jihad-style. Obama was criticized for saying we needed to "manage" the problem, but he's really articulating the sad truth. This enemy thinks in terms of centuries and is very, very patient. Their leaders don't need to get reelected.

[TobiasFunke]

[sneaky_flute]

When will people realize that the U.S.'s foreign presence is directly responsible for groups like ISIS? I don't condone ISIS's actions, but it's not America's job or right to police the world. 

[Vegas Halo Fan]

and what point is that?  how do you define that?  how did Vietnam work out for us since you picked that example.

either way we didnt pull out of Iraq due to any logic like that, it was just political pressure and capital, not logic, not completion.

 

 

Same thing in Vietnam. Just saying that using YOUR logic, we would still be there. In the end we left, the communists we were fighting for so long to hold off overran the country anyway, and we buried a lot of troops and burned through a lot of money for nothing.

 

The best course of all is not to get involved in wars like this in the first place. We went into Vietnam to "stop the commies", and we went into Iraq to find weapons of mass destruction that didn't exist.

[arch stanton]

When will people realize that the U.S.'s foreign presence is directly responsible for groups like ISIS? I don't condone ISIS's actions, but it's not America's job or right to police the world.

This is narcissistic poppycock. Are you saying theu can't even breed their own nutjobs without our assistance?

[floplag]

Same thing in Vietnam. Just saying that using YOUR logic, we would still be there. In the end we left, the communists we were fighting for so long to hold off overran the country anyway, and we buried a lot of troops and burned through a lot of money for nothing.

 

The best course of all is not to get involved in wars like this in the first place. We went into Vietnam to "stop the commies", and we went into Iraq to find weapons of mass destruction that didn't exist.

 

So in your mind its acceptable to walk away when something gets hard or inconvenient?

I expect better of my kids, i expect better of my government 

 

Once we made the decision to stick our noses in it, we should have finished the job..  the location on the map doesn't really matter in that statement, this would be true of every example you could list going back to Korea.

[TobiasFunke]

You keep talking about us not finishing the job yet you can't provide specifics of what that job is and how we could eventually finish it.

[floplag]

You keep talking about us not finishing the job yet you can't provide specifics of what that job is and how we could eventually finish it.

 

It is kind of hard to give specifics when we chose to walk away, kinda makes it moot don't you think? 

What would you like me to do.. make a whole bunch of suggestions so you can then turn around and play the conjecture card?  I'll pass.  that little run around game with some of you here is boring. 

Your a smart guy, im sure you can figure out any number of options we could have done, but chose not to for political convenience.   Even if it was nothing more than staying the course, it would have been better than what we did.

[arch stanton]

If the decisions on Iraq were made in a vacuum I could see your point but there's more to it than political convenience. Those are real people who were suckered into joining the military to fight al Qaeda then misdirected to Iraq. That was real money getting flushed down the toilet when there as another war to be fought. Short of appointing a new totalitarian dictator there was nothing we could have done in Iraq to squash the radicals. Sometimes when you paint yourself into the corner you don't have the luxury of waiting for the floor to dry.

[TobiasFunke]

It is kind of hard to give specifics when we chose to walk away, kinda makes it moot don't you think? No. And it's not hard to give specifics, maybe for you if you don't have any. You just know that we shouldn't have left Iraq and Obama made a terrible decision in your opinion. So if it was up to you we would still have troops patrolling villages in Iraq like we are in Afghanistan.

What would you like me to do.. make a whole bunch of suggestions?  You mean god forbid back up your opinion? Yes that's what I'd like you to do

im sure you can figure out any number of options we could have done.  Actually no, because that's my stance on the matter. The only other thing we could have done was continue to bleed soldiers and money into the country.

 

Even if it was nothing more than staying the course, it would have been better than what we did. Though I completely disagree with this, at least you were man enough to say an opinion other than "we didn't do the right thing in Iraq and don't ask what that right thing could have been because I don't want to be baited into telling you" and I respect you for it.

Are you and Jay the same poster?

[TobiasFunke]

Sometimes when you paint yourself into the corner you don't have the luxury of waiting for the floor to dry.

Never heard this line before. Brilliant.

[gotbeer]

If the decisions on Iraq were made in a vacuum I could see your point but there's more to it than political convenience. Those are real people who were suckered into joining the military to fight al Qaeda then misdirected to Iraq. That was real money getting flushed down the toilet when there as another war to be fought. Short of appointing a new totalitarian dictator there was nothing we could have done in Iraq to squash the radicals. Sometimes when you paint yourself into the corner you don't have the luxury of waiting for the floor to dry.

 

I think there might have been two things we could have done differently that might have had a different outcome.  First of course is, we should have stayed during Bush Sr.'s term.  That would have brought an international coalition to help us.  Second would have been not to dissolve the Iraqi military after the second invasion.  If I remember correctly, those soldiers were even barred from holding police jobs.  That's what created the power vacuum, and gave the terrorists a whole bunch of mercs.  

[Adam]

I posted this in a FB thread a while ago. Wouldn't it be cool if every human being had a death tracker digitized over his/her head, which displayed the number of deaths they were directly involved in?

[floplag]

Are you and Jay the same poster?

no more than you and some of you clones are. 

 

its simple, we either finish the job, or we dont.  where we differ is in what that means.  you feel it was finished, i say if that true we wouldnt be where we are today.

for the record It would not be my choice to have our soldiers all over the world in these places, but once that decision is made, we need to finish the job.  its a simple point.  if that means the result is that this would be the case then so be it, its better than continuously going back over and over and re-fighting over the same ground isnt it ?