I chose my nickname because I think these disagreeable little guys are absolutely lovable BECAUSE of their ornery nature and in a way it SOMETIMES reflects my own attitude when posting.
With that out of the way I will get to the meat of the matter.
ISIS fighters are old school or fundamentalist Muslims and as such they hate hypocrites and apostates.
Those who fight for the Iraqi government are not following the doctrine or examples of the Prophet, Mohammed, and as such they are considered apostates and deserve to die..
And as Muslims themselves, they know full well that they are in Jahiliyyah.
Jahiliyyah (Arabic: جاهلية ǧāhiliyyah/jāhilīyah "ignorance") is an Islamic concept of "ignorance of divine guidance" or "the state of ignorance of the guidance from God" or "Days of Ignorance" referring to the barbaric condition in which Arabs found themselves in pre-Islamic Arabia (in the non-Islamic sense), i.e. prior to the revelation of the Quran to Muhammad. The root of the term jahiliyyah is the I-form verb jahala "to be ignorant or stupid, to act stupidly".Jahiliyyah - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaJahiliyya in contemporary society
Main article: Qutbism
Use of the term for modern Muslim society is usually associated with Qutb's other radical ideas (or Qutbism) – namely that reappearance of Jahiliyya is a result of the lack of Sharia law, without which Islam cannot exist; that true Islam is a complete system with no room for any element of Jahiliyya; that all aspects of Jahiliyya ("manners, ideas and concepts, rules and regulations, values and criteria") are "evil and corrupt"
Non-Muslim societies may also be termed jahili (Arabic: جاهلي ǧāhilī ). One western academic has compared the idea of contemporary Jahiliyya in some radical Islamic circles to the secular Marxist idea of false consciousness – in each case the masses being unaware they are not following their true consciousness by rising up to overthrow the capitalist system and replacing it with socialism (in the case of Marxism); or overthrow the secular state and replace it with the true Islam of strict sharia law (in the case of Qutbism).
And after so many well publicized recent examples of be-headings, being burned alive, and other grotesque or even less hideous forms of execution by these "true Muslims," the soldiers of the apostate Iraqi government would have the fear of Allah put into them the closer the true Jihadi warriors got to them.
They ran to fight another day or else risk death.
Maybe they will be more willing to fight later and under different circumstances, but who knows?
I believe it is a matter of the Iraqi soldiers knowing they have no Islamic validation for doing what they are doing in support of an apostate government and so they flee to avoid the wrath of the TRUE Muslims.
My humble opinion.
Second, there is usually a reason some countries live under dictatorships. Usually their people are barbaric and are politically unstable. Look what happened when Saddam fell. Chaos broke out and
I had just begun skimming the article when I saw this and it struck me as being so biased it reeked of dis-ingenuity.Jeb and Co. claim that everything was fine in Iraq until Obama failed to keep George W.'s ill-conceived war of aggression running on full throttle. They pretend the 2007 "surge" in Iraq of about 10,000 American soldiers had all but "won" the war and the rise of ISIL/ISIS is Obama's fault. They skip over the pesky fact that it was George W. who negotiated the U.S. troop withdrawal with the Nouri al Maliki regime. (Bush announced the deal at a memorable press conference with Maliki when an Iraqi journalist hurled his shoes at the Leader of the Free World.)
I don't recall Jeb or anyone in a position to know who said everything was "fine in Iraq until Obama failed."
I think the consensus at the time was that Iraq was relatively stable but it would require a long term commitment of US forces to help maintain that stability.
And the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) could well have been negotiated and agreed upon had the persuasive Obama actually wanted to reach such an agreement.
It would have been politically hazardous for him.
We all know every POTUS has to give some thought to the political ramification of every decision and policy. It is foolish to think otherwise, no matter who the POTUS is or from which political party.
However, we have seen since then that Obama is more than willing to place partisan politics ahead of the good of the country.
And in the final analysis we all can see what happened as a result.
So, whether or not you liked Bushy, you have to admit he was correct on this score.
From the WashPo:
George W. Bush was right about Iraq pullout - The Washington PostIn the summer of 2007, Bush warned of the dire consequence of pulling U.S. troops out of Iraq against the advice of our commanders on the ground. All of Washington was telling Bush that the surge he had launched would fail and that the time had come to withdraw from Iraq and accept defeat.
At a White House news conference on July 12, 2007, Bush declared: “I know some in Washington would like us to start leaving Iraq now. To begin withdrawing before our commanders tell us we’re ready would be dangerous for Iraq, for the region and for the United States. It would mean surrendering the future of Iraq to al-Qaeda. It would mean that we’d be risking mass killings on a horrific scale. It would mean we’d allow the terrorists to establish a safe haven in Iraq to replace the one they lost in Afghanistan. It would mean we’d be increasing the probability that American troops would have to return at some later date to confront an enemy that is even more dangerous.”
He had no idea at the time how prophetic his words would be.