Obama, summer 2015: "No combat in Iraq" - Pentagon, winter 2016: "We're in combat in Iraq"
20 replies, posted
[quote]The Pentagon conceded Wednesday that U.S. troops are in combat in Iraq after days of dancing around the characterization following the first death of U.S. service member in the campaign against ISIS.
"We're in combat," Army Col. Steve Warren, a Pentagon spokesman, told reporters Wednesday. "I mean, of course, this is a combat zone. There's a war going on in Iraq, if folks haven't noticed. And we're here and it's all around us."
The comments came after Master Sgt. Joshua L. Wheeler was killed last week in a raid to free hostages held by ISIS. They are in stark contrast to President Barack Obama's insistence last summer that "American forces will not be returning to combat in Iraq" while announcing the decision to assist Iraqis fighting ISIS.
[/quote]
[url]http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/29/politics/iraq-isis-military-combat/index.html[/url]
They really do not know when to admit defeat, do they?
and yet congress won't authorize his military action, simultaneously they mock him for not getting authorization to continue military action there....
In just a little while, we've have been in this shithole for [i][b]twenty fucking years[/i][/b]
[QUOTE=ZakkShock;49589079]In just a little while, we've have been in this shithole for [i][b]twenty fucking years[/i][/b][/QUOTE]
aka pretty much my entire rememberable life. it sure has been a while huh.
what a sad state of affairs.
[QUOTE=ZakkShock;49589079]In just a little while, we've have been in this shithole for [i][b]twenty fucking years[/i][/b][/QUOTE]
man how old are you that 7 years is "just a little while"
[QUOTE=ZakkShock;49589079]In just a little while, we've have been in this shithole for [I][B]twenty fucking years[/B][/I][/QUOTE]
We've been in Iraq for 25 years
Desert Storm(90-91) - Present
[QUOTE=SGTSpartans;49589127]We've been in Iraq for 25 years
Desert Storm(90-91) - Present[/QUOTE]
we were there for five days in desert storm
[QUOTE=Perrine;49589119]man how old are you that 7 years is "just a little while"[/QUOTE]
Sometimes I keep thinking it's still 2010.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;49588532][url]http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/29/politics/iraq-isis-military-combat/index.html[/url][/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Updated 11:08 AM ET, Fri October 30, 2015[/QUOTE]
[editline]23rd January 2016[/editline]
It's an old article
Just because you don't put your troops into combat roles doesn't mean combat can't come to them. You're pretty much an idiot if you believe that you can sends troops to a warzone in a supporting role and 100% expect them to never risk getting into a fight.
Alrighty then, I guess? Not sure what the big deal is here. Our military is being used like it was before, and it's being used like it's supposed to be.
[QUOTE=ZakkShock;49589079]In just a little while, we've have been in this shithole for [i][b]twenty fucking years[/i][/b][/QUOTE]
A little while = 7 more years? 50% longer than we've been there now?
[QUOTE=Riller;49590638]Just because you don't put your troops into combat roles doesn't mean combat can't come to them. You're pretty much an idiot if you believe that you can sends troops to a warzone in a supporting role and 100% expect them to never risk getting into a fight.[/QUOTE]
If anything I'd hazard that the risk of death when getting into that inevitable combat is much higher for a force not deployed in a combat capacity, because they probably lack a decent field hospital and MERT capability, at least not as large, well-equipped or quick to respond, when compared to a full-on operation like Iraq 03-14 or Afghanistan. In fact, I wonder whether the 'liaison' and assistance units even have helicopters for those who get badly injured. They're probably feeling quite isolated out there.
[QUOTE=Jon27;49592668]If anything I'd hazard that the risk of death when getting into that inevitable combat is much higher for a force not deployed in a combat capacity, because they probably lack a decent field hospital and MERT capability, at least not as large, well-equipped or quick to respond, when compared to a full-on operation like Iraq 03-14 or Afghanistan. In fact, I wonder whether the 'liaison' and assistance units even have helicopters for those who get badly injured. They're probably feeling quite isolated out there.[/QUOTE]
It's not like the Iraqi army they're supporting are complete cavemen. They are fairly well-equipped and have medevac capabilities.
[QUOTE=Riller;49590638]Just because you don't put your troops into combat roles doesn't mean combat can't come to them. You're pretty much an idiot if you believe that you can sends troops to a warzone in a supporting role and 100% expect them to never risk getting into a fight.[/QUOTE]
I mean obviously you can't be 100% certain of keeping them out of combat, if that's your intent, but until opposition militants have air combat capability (so like, never) you CAN pretty safely keep them out of at-risk conflict areas. As long as the people they're fighting are forced to fight a ground war, they can have a pretty good expectation for avoiding combat.
[QUOTE=Riller;49592919]It's not like the Iraqi army they're supporting are complete cavemen. They are fairly well-equipped and have medevac capabilities.[/QUOTE]
Although the media would have you believe the Iraqi army is the same group of shitlords that did a bunch of not-very-army things when ISIS first arrived, point taken.
[QUOTE=soulharvester;49593351]I mean obviously you can't be 100% certain of keeping them out of combat, if that's your intent, but until opposition militants have air combat capability (so like, never) you CAN pretty safely keep them out of at-risk conflict areas. As long as the people they're fighting are forced to fight a ground war, they can have a pretty good expectation for avoiding combat.[/QUOTE]
And what, abandon their base and leave a bunch of half-trained Iraqi army recruits to fend for themselves when the U.S. troops were there to teach them how to fight instead of helping out with much-needed experience once the enemy comes knocking?
[QUOTE=Riller;49592919]It's not like the Iraqi army they're supporting are complete cavemen. They are fairly well-equipped and have medevac capabilities.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Riller;49593491]And what, abandon their base and leave a bunch of half-trained Iraqi army recruits to fend for themselves when the U.S. troops were there to teach them how to fight instead of helping out with much-needed experience once the enemy comes knocking?[/QUOTE]
Pick a side, these two opinions conflict.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;49593561]Pick a side, these two opinions conflict.[/QUOTE]
No they don't, some bases that ISIS attacked and took over had barely-trained troops, not to say all of them are like that, but they, you know, had to replenish their army.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;49593561]Pick a side, these two opinions conflict.[/QUOTE]
How? Being well equipped like Riller mentions in his first post does not equal very well trained, which Riller mentions in his second post.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.