Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: April 29, 2024, 4:36 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Ramadi
#21
RE: Ramadi
Okay, so at least the Obama administration understands the problem...unlike the republicunts who want to piss more money away "training" these useless shits.

http://apnews.excite.com/article/2015052...27615.html


Quote:The Islamic State group's takeover of the provincial capital Ramadi is stark evidence that Iraqi forces lack the "will to fight," Defense Secretary Ash Carter acknowledged, a harsh assessment that raised new questions about the Obama administration's strategy to defeat the extremist group that has seized a strategically important swath of the Middle East.

Although Iraqi soldiers "vastly outnumbered" their opposition in the capital of Anbar province, they quickly withdrew last Sunday without putting up much resistance from the city in Iraq's Sunni heartland, Carter said on CNN's "State of the Union." The interview aired on Sunday.

We broke it, we can't fix it, and the world will pay a terrible price for Bush's stupidity for a very long time.
Reply
#22
RE: Ramadi
(May 19, 2015 at 2:46 am)CapnAwesome Wrote: Iraq is a fake bullshit country that was made up by the British post WWI. The people there associate as Shia, Sunni or Kurds and nobody is willing to fight for Iraq.

How many countries didn't start out by some foreign or domestic despot faked it by hold disparate elements together by force, until the fake became to long established by custom that it seem more real than real and everyone though the country is so natural it was handed down in its current format by some deity?

(May 20, 2015 at 2:58 pm)Parkers Tan Wrote: I think they're volunteering for a steady three meals a day, and don't give much of a shit about anything else.

I say we let Iran handle it. They stand to lose the most, they stand to gain little (because they already have an immense amount of influence on the Iraqi government), and it is usually wise statecraft to let one's enemies tire themselves against each other.

No, they volunteered to be thugs and racketeers backed by a government.   Not to fight where the other side shoots back.

This is possibly the first army in history that enjoyed vast superiority in equipment, total air supremacy, and a 40:1 numerical advantage on the ground, and still lost.

It's like the entire marine corp being defeated by the army of the 

There is something perverse about giving such an army 8 billion dollars of equipment.   
Reply
#23
RE: Ramadi
It is true that the only effective fighters on the same side of this conflict are the Kurds and Shiite militias. Obviously, the Kurds remain our most reliable ally in the region, and the only group consistently committed to liberal & secular democracy. The Shiite militias are basically a lesser of two evils (but they certainly carry a lot of theocratic baggage). Of course this is complicated by the fact that the most powerful Shiite country, Iran, is a longtime enemy of Israel, an ally to whom we lend unquestioning support (no matter how obscene their treatment of indigenous Palestinian populations). 

So the situation is becoming exceedingly complex and unmanageable. My major concern is how terrorism has been used as a pretext to erode our freedoms here at home. Although, if we were to stop treating Israel so deferentially, stop lending unconditional support and demand the same adherence to human rights principles as we demand of everyone else, it would go a long way towards restoring some of our credibility. IMO we should also begin to ratchet up pressure on Saudi Arabia, who has one of the worse human rights records on earth. I do still think it's important to continue negotiating with the Iranians so they don't acquire nuclear weapons, and I'm not at all suggesting that we should break ties with Israel (just more aggressively demand that they do the right thing, like withdraw some of their settlements and stop building more settlements, and show more military restraint). But if we weren't perceived to be so one sided, I think we could build a winning coalition of Shiites and moderate Sunni's against extremist groups like ISIS.
Reply
#24
RE: Ramadi
Quote:Of course this is complicated by the fact that the most powerful Shiite country, Iran, is a longtime enemy of Israel,

Also true of the Sunnis.  In fact, its probably the only thing they agree on and even there they probably disagree on how to go about it.  Right now they are too busy slaughtering each other to worry about the Israelis.
Reply
#25
RE: Ramadi
(May 24, 2015 at 12:42 pm)Chuck Wrote: No, they volunteered to be thugs and racketeers backed by a government.   Not to fight where the other side shoots back.

I stand corrected -- these are fair points. Corrupt armies have hollow combat values, and they clearly won't even fight for three meals a day.

Reply
#26
RE: Ramadi
Quote:Mercenaries and auxiliaries are useless and dangerous; and if one holds his state based on these arms, he will stand neither firm nor safe; for they are disunited, ambitious and without discipline, unfaithful, valiant before friends, cowardly before enemies; they have neither the fear of God nor fidelity to men, and destruction is deferred only so long as the attack is; for in peace one is robbed by them, and in war by the enemy. The fact is, they have no other attraction or reason for keeping the field than a trifle of stipend, which is not sufficient to make them willing to die for you. They are ready enough to be your soldiers whilst you do not make war, but if war comes they take themselves off or run from the foe


Niccolo Machiavelli, The Prince  

It was true in 1513 and it is still true today.
Reply
#27
RE: Ramadi
See, that's a book on the list I need to read.

Reply
#28
RE: Ramadi
http://www.pagebypagebooks.com/Nicolo_Ma...he_Prince/
Reply
#29
RE: Ramadi
(May 24, 2015 at 8:13 pm)Minimalist Wrote:
Quote:Mercenaries and auxiliaries are useless and dangerous; and if one holds his state based on these arms, he will stand neither firm nor safe; for they are disunited, ambitious and without discipline, unfaithful, valiant before friends, cowardly before enemies; they have neither the fear of God nor fidelity to men, and destruction is deferred only so long as the attack is; for in peace one is robbed by them, and in war by the enemy. The fact is, they have no other attraction or reason for keeping the field than a trifle of stipend, which is not sufficient to make them willing to die for you. They are ready enough to be your soldiers whilst you do not make war, but if war comes they take themselves off or run from the foe


Niccolo Machiavelli, The Prince  

It was true in 1513 and it is still true today.

The "army" of the Iraq that we created does not qualify even as an mercenary army.   A true mercenary army, however treacherous, usually has some non-zero record of esprit de corp and fighting skill, such that it could at least be attempted to be believed that when correctly incentivized (for example by having absolute air supremacy and out numbering its foes 40 to 1), it would put up some pretense of fighting that would not be too ambarassing to watch.

What we have under the banner of "Iraqi national army" is an opportunistic second rate gang, not even a mercenary army.

Iraq has the raw material to make a real mercenary army.   It is the trained Sunni officers and men of saddam's old iraqi national army.    But in the glorious wisdom unique to neoconservatism, spiked with gloating vindictive non-inclusivity of American right wing in general, we cashiered those men, sent them packing back to their sunni homes and installed a Shia regime, just as corrupt as saddam and far less capable of keeping the lights on and the street so safe, over them to rob them blind.    So those men, who could actually have given the new Iraqi state a mercenary army worthy of the name "army", are now with the Sunni Islamic State.

So guess what, if only the new Iraqi state had a mercenary army that is actually an army, it wouldn't be in its current state.   But such mercenary army as could be had in post saddam Iraq is, guess what, training and fighting for the Sunni IS, against the shia Iraqi state we, the U.S., had set up, thanks entirely to US of A and the same bunch who screamed for a witch hunt against Clinton over Benghazi.
Reply
#30
RE: Ramadi
This is what they recruited:

http://iraqdinar.us/unemployment-rate-in-iraq/


Quote:Minister of Labor: The unemployment rate in Iraq exceeded the 46%

You know that saying on the recruiting posters:  "It's not just a job its an adventure?"  In Iraq, it's just a job..... and one that no one is going to die to keep.
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Juarez? Ramadi? Nope. The Grand Nudger 5 946 January 12, 2016 at 9:12 pm
Last Post: The Grand Nudger



Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)