Then the question becomes if they would be able to roll through western Iraq with the ease they did. Your gut may say no, as of course ISIS is no match for the American Military. But there's a lot more considerations that would have to be taken into account. For instance, the local Sunny populace anger at the regime in Baghdad, would still be very sympathetic to ISIS coming in and offering them something better. This is also assuming that the Iraqi Government would of allowed the US Military to interfere in the early stages where some good could of occurred. At that time, Maliki had a lot to prove to his own people, specifically that he didn't need American support (aka not their puppet). This would lead to his overconfidence and allowing ISIS to push them back further and further. In the end, you've got a US military base in the middle of hostile territory, cut off from land routes of supply. We'd have Hamburger Hill in the desert.
So no, I don't think even if we still had that Base manned and operational, would it of been able to stop ISIS. The politics in the area are still what they are.
Last edited by Hamster Buddha; 01-17-15 at 05:48 AM.
Isolating our lands and expecting the east to destroy themselves only allows for an all encompassing leader to emerge like: Genghiz Khan, Atill the Hun, Ottoman Empire, etc. Being proactive is better then reactive.
Something major would have to shift for these two to work together.