• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Iraq lost 2,300 Humvees in Mosul: PM

Anomalism

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 2, 2013
Messages
3,237
Reaction score
2,159
Location
Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Tax money well spent. :doh

Iraq lost 2,300 Humvees in Mosul: PM | News , Middle East | THE DAILY STAR

Iraqi security forces lost 2,300 Humvee armored vehicles when ISIS overran the northern city of Mosul, Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi said on Sunday. "In the collapse of Mosul, we lost a lot of weapons," Abadi said in an interview with Iraqiya state TV. "We lost 2,300 Humvees in Mosul alone." While the exact price of the vehicles varies depending on how they are armored and equipped, it is clearly a hugely expensive loss that has boosted ISIS's capabilities. Last year, the State Department approved a possible sale to Iraq of 1,000 Humvees with increased armor, machineguns, grenade launchers, other gear and support that was estimated to cost $579 million. Clashes began in Mosul, Iraq's second city, late on June 9, 2014, and Iraqi forces lost it the following day to ISIS, which spearheaded an offensive that overran much of the country's Sunni Arab heartland.

The militants gained ample arms, ammunition and other equipment when multiple Iraqi divisions fell apart in the country's north, abandoning gear and shedding uniforms in their haste to flee. ISIS has used captured Humvees, which were provided to Iraq by the United States, in subsequent fighting, rigging some with explosives for suicide bombings. Iraqi security forces backed by Shiite militias have regained significant ground from ISIS in Diyala and Salaheddin provinces north of Baghdad. But that momentum was slashed in mid-May when ISIS overran Ramadi, the capital of Anbar province, west of Baghdad, where Iraqi forces had held out against militants for more than a year.
 
What did everyone expect here? That an Iraqi military so prone to running away from ISIS would ensure they took all the Humvees with them?

Again, I do not think enough people realize what so many years and Presidents worth of foreign policy has really yielded us here. It is not pretty, and by all evidence is bound to get worse.
 
Tax money well spent. :doh

Iraq lost 2,300 Humvees in Mosul: PM | News , Middle East | THE DAILY STAR

Iraqi security forces lost 2,300 Humvee armored vehicles when ISIS overran the northern city of Mosul, Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi said on Sunday. "In the collapse of Mosul, we lost a lot of weapons," Abadi said in an interview with Iraqiya state TV. "We lost 2,300 Humvees in Mosul alone." While the exact price of the vehicles varies depending on how they are armored and equipped, it is clearly a hugely expensive loss that has boosted ISIS's capabilities. Last year, the State Department approved a possible sale to Iraq of 1,000 Humvees with increased armor, machineguns, grenade launchers, other gear and support that was estimated to cost $579 million. Clashes began in Mosul, Iraq's second city, late on June 9, 2014, and Iraqi forces lost it the following day to ISIS, which spearheaded an offensive that overran much of the country's Sunni Arab heartland.

The militants gained ample arms, ammunition and other equipment when multiple Iraqi divisions fell apart in the country's north, abandoning gear and shedding uniforms in their haste to flee. ISIS has used captured Humvees, which were provided to Iraq by the United States, in subsequent fighting, rigging some with explosives for suicide bombings. Iraqi security forces backed by Shiite militias have regained significant ground from ISIS in Diyala and Salaheddin provinces north of Baghdad. But that momentum was slashed in mid-May when ISIS overran Ramadi, the capital of Anbar province, west of Baghdad, where Iraqi forces had held out against militants for more than a year.

The investment of blood and treasure in the invasion of Iraq just keeps paying dividends, doesn't it?
 
What did everyone expect here? That an Iraqi military so prone to running away from ISIS would ensure they took all the Humvees with them?

Again, I do not think enough people realize what so many years and Presidents worth of foreign policy has really yielded us here. It is not pretty, and by all evidence is bound to get worse.

To the bolded, bingo buddy!!
 
We cashed out on that 'investment' in 2011.

We cashed out on that investment when the 2006 NIE concluded that the invasion and occupation of Iraq caused an increase to global terrorism, and made America less safe.
 
We cashed out on that investment when the 2006 NIE concluded that the invasion and occupation of Iraq caused an increase to global terrorism, and made America less safe.

And what was done, can't be undone.
 
That's ok, ISIS is just part of the moderate rebels we want to oust Assad.
 
We cashed out on that investment when the 2006 NIE concluded that the invasion and occupation of Iraq caused an increase to global terrorism, and made America less safe.

Wrong. As usual. We were still fully invested in 2006. In fact we were about to double down.
 
Wrong. As usual. We were still fully invested in 2006. In fact we were about to double down.

In FACT, the same time the intelligence agencies were giving Bush an F on his war efforts, the Islamic State in Iraq (ISI) organized. :lamo
 
Wrong. As usual. We were still fully invested in 2006. In fact we were about to double down.

Even in 2012, President Pinprick and the Delaware Dunce were both crowing about what a successful result had been achieved in Iraq, and were even trying to take credit for it. But Pinprick let victory slip away by his gross incompetence, and he let it slip away quickly. Hundreds of Americans died to secure Ramadi, for example, and as of now, they seem to have died in vain. After all these months of Pinprick's war against the JV team, as he called ISIS, he could not even manage to keep that city from falling to a few thousand jihadist mutts.
 
Terror flourishes under Obama.

After it was first given life by Bush!!!

July, 2007

The invasion of Iraq breathed new life into the (Al Qaeda) organization. On an operational level, the United States diverted troops to Iraq rather than consolidate its victory in Afghanistan and increase its chances of hunting down Bin Ladin. Today, Al Qa’ida is reconstituting itself in the tribal areas of Pakistan. Politically, Iraq vindicated bin Ladin’s argument that the primary enemy of the Muslim world was not the local Muslim autocrats, but the "faraway enemy," the United States. Today, Al Qa'ida is again on the march.[2]

It was not supposed to be this way. Toppling Saddam Hussein's regime was meant to usher in an era of prosperity for Iraq and put Osama bin Ladin and his followers on the run. Instead, the tables have turned. Today, Iraq is torn by crime, plagued by a vicious insurgency, and devoid of competent government and basic services. Strife in Iraq continues without end in sight, while the human and financial costs to the United States and its allies mount. With each car bomb and kidnapping, critics urging the withdrawal of troops grow more and more vociferous.

Every additional day that the United States remains in Iraq is a boon for Al Qa’ida and the broader jihadist movement.

:lamo:lamo:lamo

Iraq and the Global War on Terrorism | Brookings Institution
 
Even in 2012, President Pinprick and the Delaware Dunce were both crowing about what a successful result had been achieved in Iraq, and were even trying to take credit for it. But Pinprick let victory slip away by his gross incompetence, and he let it slip away quickly. Hundreds of Americans died to secure Ramadi, for example, and as of now, they seem to have died in vain. After all these months of Pinprick's war against the JV team, as he called ISIS, he could not even manage to keep that city from falling to a few thousand jihadist mutts.

Victory sailed before the US ever entered Iraq.
 
After it was first given life by Bush!!!

July, 2007

The invasion of Iraq breathed new life into the (Al Qaeda) organization. On an operational level, the United States diverted troops to Iraq rather than consolidate its victory in Afghanistan and increase its chances of hunting down Bin Ladin. Today, Al Qa’ida is reconstituting itself in the tribal areas of Pakistan. Politically, Iraq vindicated bin Ladin’s argument that the primary enemy of the Muslim world was not the local Muslim autocrats, but the "faraway enemy," the United States. Today, Al Qa'ida is again on the march.[2]

It was not supposed to be this way. Toppling Saddam Hussein's regime was meant to usher in an era of prosperity for Iraq and put Osama bin Ladin and his followers on the run. Instead, the tables have turned. Today, Iraq is torn by crime, plagued by a vicious insurgency, and devoid of competent government and basic services. Strife in Iraq continues without end in sight, while the human and financial costs to the United States and its allies mount. With each car bomb and kidnapping, critics urging the withdrawal of troops grow more and more vociferous.

Every additional day that the United States remains in Iraq is a boon for Al Qa’ida and the broader jihadist movement.

:lamo:lamo:lamo

Iraq and the Global War on Terrorism | Brookings Institution

Your tales aren't consistent with reality. I was an adult on 9/11, were you?

Bush wasn't responsible for the world on 9/11. Obama wasn't responsible 8 months after he was potus.

Stop it-everyone knows.
 
Your tales aren't consistent with reality. I was an adult on 9/11, were you?

Bush wasn't responsible for the world on 9/11. Obama wasn't responsible 8 months after he was potus.

Stop it-everyone knows.

Actually, there's only about three people left standing on your side. :lamo
 
Victory sailed before the US ever entered Iraq.

Only if you are misstating the facts, or if your president was lying about that, too.

In a December 14, 2011 speech at Fort Bragg, he said that "everything that American troops have done in Iraq had "led to this moment of success." And he claimed we were "leaving behind a sovereign, stable and self-reliant Iraq, with a representative government that was elected by its people" and were "building a new partnership between our nations." Your president called this "an extraordinary achievement, nearly nine years in the making.”

Three and one-half years ago, then, and almost three years into his presidency, Iraq was sovereign, stable, and self-reliant, according to Mr. Obama. If it no longer is, this "extraordinary achievement" was squandered away entirely on Barack Obama's watch.
 
Only if you are misstating the facts, or if your president was lying about that, too.

In a December 14, 2011 speech at Fort Bragg, he said that "everything that American troops have done in Iraq had "led to this moment of success." And he claimed we were "leaving behind a sovereign, stable and self-reliant Iraq, with a representative government that was elected by its people" and were "building a new partnership between our nations." Your president called this "an extraordinary achievement, nearly nine years in the making.”

Three and one-half years ago, then, and almost three years into his presidency, Iraq was sovereign, stable, and self-reliant, according to Mr. Obama. If it no longer is, this "extraordinary achievement" was squandered away entirely on Barack Obama's watch.

Iraq has not been "stable, sovereign, and self reliant" since the US invasion. Before that, it may have been ruled by a bloody dictator, but he was our dictator and ally in the war with Iran, and, ruled by an iron fist though it was, it was stable, sovereign, and self reliant.
 
Iraq has not been "stable, sovereign, and self reliant" since the US invasion. Before that, it may have been ruled by a bloody dictator, but he was our dictator and ally in the war with Iran, and, ruled by an iron fist though it was, it was stable, sovereign, and self reliant.

I am shocked to see anyone suggest that Mr. Obama was lying in his December, 2011 speech.
 
I am shocked to see anyone suggest that Mr. Obama was lying in his December, 2011 speech.

We were lied to in order to get into this war, why would it be a surprise that we'd be lied to in order to sustain and proliferate it? Forever War isn't typically built upon honest truth.
 
We were lied to in order to get into this war, why would it be a surprise that we'd be lied to in order to sustain and proliferate it? Forever War isn't typically built upon honest truth.

You are making things up. President Pinocchio was speaking in December, 2014 to mark the end of the U.S. military effort in Iraq. Nothing whatever about his comments was meant to "sustain" or "proliferate" that effort.

And the western world is in a war with Muslim jihadists, whether anyone likes it or not. It may go on for decades. There are millions of jihadists, they are inspired by the most orthodox texts in Islam, and they will never quit, no matter how much fools try to appease them. The only way to defeat them is to kill so many of them--and to make it look easy--that other Muslims will come to see them and their views as a losing proposition. Bin Laden was right about one thing--among them, people shun the "weak horse" and follow the strong one.
 
Back
Top Bottom