Why we stuck with Maliki -- and lost Iraq

[Kai]

Interesting article in the Washington Post today:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-we-stuck-with-maliki--and-lost-iraq/2014/07/03/0dd6a8a4-f7ec-11e3-a606-946fd632f9f1_story.html

An amazingly bad series of decisions by almost everyone involved, except maybe Iran.

Are the days of principled American war-fighting really over? I'm surprised that the US still hasn't yet been able to name the enemy in Iraq and the rest of the Mideast. Until we can do that, it's hard to have much hope for an effective military strategy or long-term peace.

[Nonstop24/7]

quote: But the vice president said Maliki was the only option. Indeed, the following month he would tell top U.S. officials, “I’ll bet you my vice presidency Maliki will extend the SOFA,” referring to the status-of-forces agreement that would allow U.S. troops to remain in Iraq past 2011

Maliiki refused to extend the SOFA, thus removing US forces from extending and then Obama makes the decision to remove all our military.

History will not look on the US kindley, Iran is the big winner and the whole Middle Eastern region will suffer for many decades.

looks like Biden lost his bet.

[Javadrinker]

quote: But the vice president said Maliki was the only option. Indeed, the following month he would tell top U.S. officials, “I’ll bet you my vice presidency Maliki will extend the SOFA,” referring to the status-of-forces agreement that would allow U.S. troops to remain in Iraq past 2011

Maliiki refused to extend the SOFA, thus removing US forces from extending and then Obama makes the decision to remove all our military.

History will not look on the US kindley, Iran is the big winner and the whole Middle Eastern region will suffer for many decades.

looks like Biden lost his bet.

Uncle Joe was ever a winner, or knew what he was talking about?

[Airbornelawyer]

Maliki has become something of a scapegoat for those looking for someone to blame for the current situation in Iraq. And finding someone else to blame is certainly much easier and more fun than trying to actually come up with a policy to deal with the situation.

Maliki certainly deserves his share of blame, but ask yourself what you would have done if you were in his shoes. Of what value was a status-of-forces agreement with a country whose leadership had made abundantly clear how much it just wanted you and your little country to go away?

I've been making this point for a decade now. Every politician in Iraq, especially the Shi'ite ones, knew that at some point the US would grow weary of war, and once that happened, the US could simply up and leave, victoriously or not. But Iran will always border Iraq, so if you want to survive long-term, you had better figure out some way to deal with or accommodate to Iran. Given a choice of which horse to back, do you really go with the prancing pony that is Obama?

[jbour13]

Maliki has become something of a scapegoat for those looking for someone to blame for the current situation in Iraq. And finding someone else to blame is certainly much easier and more fun than trying to actually come up with a policy to deal with the situation.

Maliki certainly deserves his share of blame, but ask yourself what you would have done if you were in his shoes. Of what value was a status-of-forces agreement with a country whose leadership had made abundantly clear how much it just wanted you and your little country to go away?

I've been making this point for a decade now. Every politician in Iraq, especially the Shi'ite ones, knew that at some point the US would grow weary of war, and once that happened, the US could simply up and leave, victoriously or not. But Iran will always border Iraq, so if you want to survive long-term, you had better figure out some way to deal with or accommodate to Iran. Given a choice of which horse to back, do you really go with the prancing pony that is Obama?

Iraqis may grow tired of Maliki too. I agree that Maliki is in a tough position and picked the best of the options that existed. Sadly when you have only been in a position of power for a decade, but have 1400 years of oppression by the dominant sect of Islam (Sunni), I'd say you better pick someone that has had it figured out for themselves and accept what you can for survival.

On the first sentence I stated. I expect Maliki to be "removed" or "steps aside" for someone less moderate and more heavy handed if the situation deteriorates. Sadly, this whole situation is a guessing game because we don't have a say....and we shouldn't unless the Iraqi Central Government just loses absolute control. Black market is still running well on oil revenue and I see that ISIL/ISIS/AQIM/IS (Insurgent criminal group formerly known as.....) will use whatever means to co-opt it if they can get a hold of it. That is a significant blow to the Persian states ability to control pricing on oil in the region and if Maliki can't be effective, he'll be replaced by someone who'll make it happen.

The Iranian government is keen to let him take the fall or blame. It allows them to work transparently and not seem as an actor. I'm sure Suleimani has been busy lately, but still calculated no less.

I wish Uncle Joe the best, he's an idiot that just needs to hear himself speak.