What should we do about Iraq?

SocialDemocrat said:

What do you mean by do the right's work? Is Obama immune from criticism from leftists?

Click to expand...

No, he needs all the criticism those of you on the Far Left can heap on him. After all, hardly anybody on the right criticizes him.

Navy Pride said:

And you say?

Click to expand...

Stay out. Even if we went in and saved the day, so to speak, this would happen again. And again. And again. Getting involved in some of those Middle Eastern countries is a lose-lose proposition.

Losing a few fields in northern Iraq won't affect the aggregate over the next year or so because the producers will make sure there's only enough being refined to keep the prices up. But over time they are still worthwhile commodities, especially if Iraq loses more fields or conflict spreads.

There wasn't much serious conflict affecting us over there before the 2003 Invasion. We had successfully tamped down the Taliban in Afghanistan and should've came home.

notquiteright said:

Not going to work as a stand alone unit. Before the HVT teams worked in a bevy of conventional forces that helped keep the informants safe from retaliation. That helped dilute the terrorists response as the terrorists had literally tens of thousands of targets to attack. Make the target much smaller and far more eyes focus on each team- just like the CIA team wiped out by a turn coat suicide bomber.

The surprise effect TF Dagger had in the open terrain of Afghanistan with the mercenary Northern Alliance forces is no longer a surprise. The more urban Iraq isn't Afghanistan, I doubt too many B-52 strikes can be used in Iraq.

I'm more of the mindset that a hammer doesn't fix this, a pen does. Unless the people feel their future lies with the government they will not support stability but rather violent protest. Unless a true political resolution is achieved tribal strife will dominate the region. Now we have a region primed for the sunni/shi'ite showdown. No amount of special units will stop this.

Click to expand...

I was a part of TF Dagger in Iraq (we were tasked with kill/capturing the HVTs on the "card deck"). What I think made it successful, is that we weren't going after petty thieves. We went after leadership, the guys that led these cells and gave them confidence to fight. This could still function in Iraq. We have the largest and most expensive embassy in the world there (4,700,000 sq ft) it was built to be a secure long term facility. All we would need to do is have a few units there that could conduct quick strike operations to disrupt enemy forces. This is not much different than what we did before, operating out of team houses or FOBs, conducting quick strikes then going back to our safe zones.

If we could take out key leaders, we could disrupt enemy forces, and give Iraqi military the chance to regroup and bring the fight back to the enemy. We could also provide air support.

There is a need for stability there and a government that has all of the citizens best interest in mind (This is not what Maliki is doing) but just doing nothing is going to lead to ethnic cleansing on a massive scale and once groups like ISIS can eliminate/subdue the opposition they can set up a government of their own where they will start conducting operations outside of their border just like AQ did in Afghanistan. Except ISIS would now have Iraqs oil resources to fund their operations as well as the equipment left behind the Iraqi military.

Navy Pride said:

And you say?

Click to expand...

We already ****ed it up to this degree once. I say we quit now while we're ahead. More intervention will only make it worse.

I think ISIS could be a serious treat, not only to the western world, but also to all countries near Iraq and Syria. The situation is seriously escalating and the US, as one of the major world powers, should at least help to restore peace (and not by bombing the country, but by diplomatic solutions).

A state with an obliged religion, like a caliphate, is a direct treat to the whole world (not only the western world) and world peace.

It started with Syria and Iraq, but where will this end? Iran, Jordan, Israel, Libanon,...?

So in my opinion, US should definitely do something.

Navy Pride said:

I have a question for you lefties who want to stay the hell out. How much are you willing to pay for gas? $5.00 a gallon $10/00. a gallon because if we wah our hands of Iraq that is what we will pay.

Click to expand...

Is that what it's really all about?

Navy Pride said:

And you say?

Click to expand...

Add up the money we've spent in Iraq. Take 2% of that and use it to advance automotive transportation that does not require petroleum including:

1. Offering research grants with accountability components to universities and industry to develop and improve electric car battery technology.

2. Offer tax rebates to electric car buyers making their net cost on par with cars than run on gasoline.

3. Set performance and costs benchmarks for the federal automobile fleet. Whichever car company can develop a new electric car that meets those benchmarks first gets the contract to supply all federal government cars for however long whatever business model makes sense. State and local governments who purchase non-emergency cars and choose to buy this vehicle will get a 50% rebate from Washington.

4. Once these benchmarks are met, all future vehicles needed by the federal government with the exceptions of law enforcement and military vehicles until such time as they're performance suppresses them, which will probably be sooner rather than later; must be electric, hydrogen or some other new technology that does not require petroleum.

5. The DOT partners with businesses throughout the county to equip rest areas along the Interstate highway system with electric car recharging facilities. Recharging station owners get a 25 year free rent lease at rest areas and agree to offer recharging services on the following conditions: No single owner may operate both the east and west or north and south stations at the same location to encourage competitive rates. Since presently recharging an electric car is more time consuming than filling up with gas, each station must have at least one restaurant, wifi, a free to use fitness center and a free to watch 2 screen movie theater; ideally one that plays news or documentaries and the other older movies from the 80s and 90s.

Navy Pride said:

I have a question for you lefties who want to stay the hell out. How much are you willing to pay for gas? $5.00 a gallon $10/00. a gallon because if we wah our hands of Iraq that is what we will pay.

Click to expand...

Navy Pride....only 3 in your poll thought we should go back in. Are the remaining 52 all "lefties"?

year2late said:

Navy Pride....only 3 in your poll thought we should go back in. Are the remaining 52 all "lefties"?

Click to expand...

I don't see many Conservatives there my left wing friend. I guess you people have no problem with $10. a gallon gas prices.

Navy Pride said:

I don't see many Conservatives there my left wing friend. I guess you people have no problem with $10. a gallon gas prices.

Click to expand...

You need new glasses if you don't see many there.

How many American deaths are you ok with for a dollar off a gallon of gas?

Navy Pride said:

I don't see many Conservatives there my left wing friend. I guess you people have no problem with $10. a gallon gas prices.

Click to expand...

Firstly, I seriously doubt that gas prices will rise that high even if all the oil in Iraq ceases to exist.

Secondly, what gives us the right to inflict ourselves on these people YET AGAIN.

Is all this back and forth, we're there, we're not, oh we're back again, just because of ****ING POLITICS BACK IN AMERICA?

What the **** is wrong with us?

Navy Pride said:

I don't see many Conservatives there my left wing friend. I guess you people have no problem with $10. a gallon gas prices.

Click to expand...

You want American soldiers and Iraqi civilians dead, just so you can have cheaper gas. That's disgusting.

CanadaJohn said:

It's too late - America, for better or worse, cut their ties with respect to protection of Iraq back in 2010/11. One could argue that the problems in Iraq today are the result of Obama inattention to the Middle East, starting with the Arab Spring, the youth uprisings in Iran, and the total butchering of the situation in Syria. But that bed has been made. Time to let the people of the region fight for their own lifestyles and survival.

Click to expand...

Of course.. Obama's fault. Ever consider that there was never a situation in which Iraq could have held its **** together other than to have let a stern dictator like Saddam run things? Its a country with three different cultures that was created because of the split of the Ottoman empire. There never will be a stable government in Iraq, and the sooner we realize this the better we and everyone else will be.

I say let them have their civil war, let them split apart and take it from there.

But for the love of god, stay the hell out of Iraq.

Navy Pride said:

I don't see many Conservatives there my left wing friend. I guess you people have no problem with $10. a gallon gas prices.

Click to expand...

So you consider all fifty five of those folks "lefties"?

year2late said:

So you consider all fifty five of those folks "lefties"?

Click to expand...

Realistically speaking, nearly everyone on this forum is to the left of Navy Pride.

Most of the conservatives included, let alone libertarians or independents.

The Mark said:

Realistically speaking, nearly everyone on this forum is to the left of Navy Pride.

Most of the conservatives included, let alone libertarians or independents.

Click to expand...

I get that, but I am curious if he considers all fifty six "lefties".

The Mark said:

But is it even possible to form an inclusive government? Hell so far as I can tell, the Kurds want their own place and to be left alone, but the Sunni and Shia factions want to damn well kill each other.

What little I know indicates a fundamental difference in religious belief...

Click to expand...

Right, The Sunni consider the Shia to be infidels, the same way they consider the rest of the world.. They would not be satisfied with a three state solution...They want it all...

Juanita said:

Right, The Sunni consider the Shia to be infidels, the same way they consider the rest of the world.. They would not be satisfied with a three state solution...They want it all...

Click to expand...

As I understand it, they disagreed on something back when the founder of Islam died, and here we are today with the same disagreement.

Kobie said:

Gas prices (which have fluctuated over the last 2-3 years but basically averaged out stagnant) are not particularly affected by Iraq.

I'm not saying that gas prices aren't up, just that any turmoil in Iraq isn't the cause. Oil is a global market, which includes production and consumption. And the idea that U.S. gas prices will TRIPLE (which NP said when he made his $10/gal claim) is preposterous.

Click to expand...

OK, but if you take Iraqi oil out of the world pool of oil, there will be less oil in the pot thus rising oil prices. The demand will be the same, but the supply will be smaller..

Kobie said:

And how on earth do you propose that we do that without another prolonged occupation?

Click to expand...

We won the dam war and should have established a base there from the beginning, but hindsight is 20/20... The enemy of your enemy is now your friend seems to be the trend right now, so let's take advantage of that.Between Iran, Russian planes, Syrian air attacks and the U.S. we should be able to defeat The new Islamic State...Then give the Kurds their own country and reunite the Sunni and Shia under a unified government...

JulesG said:

I think ISIS could be a serious treat, not only to the western world, but also to all countries near Iraq and Syria. The situation is seriously escalating and the US, as one of the major world powers, should at least help to restore peace (and not by bombing the country, but by diplomatic solutions).

A state with an obliged religion, like a caliphate, is a direct treat to the whole world (not only the western world) and world peace.

It started with Syria and Iraq, but where will this end? Iran, Jordan, Israel, Libanon,...?

So in my opinion, US should definitely do something.

Click to expand...

Diplomacy has not worked among those folks... ever... hundreds of years. We should stay out for now; see who wins last man standing winner takes all. If the winners are hostile and combative, we should send them the traveling road show version of "The DRESDEN FOLLIES" meets "The BLITZKRIEG"

I'm old, tired, aggravated, and resigned to the lack of efficacy our intervention will exhibit. We will be unable to end an ages old ideological war; but we can certainly address the last man.

No proportional responses. I see a vast glassy area with plenty of parking for a Walmart , Costco, McDonald's and any Good Southern Pork BBQ roadside stand .

out of patience....

Thom Paine

Juanita said:

OK, but if you take Iraqi oil out of the world pool of oil, there will be less oil in the pot thus rising oil prices. The demand will be the same, but the supply will be smaller..

Click to expand...

That's not necessarily how it works, because oil production is not a zero-sum game. Other countries (like us, or Canada) can increase the production to make a difference. Production capacity really isn't the problem, it's refining capacity.

The Mark said:

Firstly, I seriously doubt that gas prices will rise that high even if all the oil in Iraq ceases to exist.

Secondly, what gives us the right to inflict ourselves on these people YET AGAIN.

Is all this back and forth, we're there, we're not, oh we're back again, just because of ****ING POLITICS BACK IN AMERICA?

What the **** is wrong with us?

Click to expand...

You know, we have the bad habit of throwing ourselves/invading other countries and then leaving them to handle the aftermath of our actions on their own..We didn't do this after WWII and look at the difference. We have bases in Japan South Korea, Germany and other countries as well and these countries flourished... Look at Iraq and Libya...We didn't finish the job.. We have to stop making these mistakes....

Juanita said:

You know, we have the bad habit of throwing ourselves/invading other countries and then leaving them to handle the aftermath of our actions on their own..We didn't do this after WWII and look at the difference. We have bases in Japan South Korea, Germany and other countries as well and these countries flourished... Look at Iraq and Libya...We didn't finish the job.. We have to stop making these mistakes....

Click to expand...

Part of the reason is the nature of the enemy - in WWII we fought a more..."formal" war, with formed units and uniformed enemies to oppose.

In Iraq the enemies often blend into the civilians.

Additionally, in WWII I suspect we were far more comfortable with "collateral damage".