Go Back   Professional Soldiers ® > At Ease > The Soapbox

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-03-2014, 20:40   #1
Kai
Asset
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 38
Why we stuck with Maliki -- and lost Iraq

Interesting article in the Washington Post today:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinio...9f1_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.
__________________
The reward for good work is more work.
Kai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-2014, 11:35   #2
Nonstop24/7
Asset
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Ozark, Al
Posts: 28
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.
Nonstop24/7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-2014, 12:29   #3
Javadrinker
Guerrilla
 
Javadrinker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Texas
Posts: 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nonstop24/7 View Post
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?
Javadrinker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2014, 07:03   #4
Airbornelawyer
Moderator
 
Airbornelawyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,937
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?
Airbornelawyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2014, 09:16   #5
jbour13
Area Commander
 
jbour13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: JBLM
Posts: 1,246
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airbornelawyer View Post
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.
__________________
http://teamrwb.com/

"Let the blood of the infantry flow through your veins,or the blood of the infantry will be on your hands."
- GEN John A. Wickham, Jr. speaking on the responsibilities of MI soldiers.
jbour13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:27.



Copyright 2004-2022 by Professional Soldiers ®
Site Designed, Maintained, & Hosted by Hilliker Technologies