The Iraqi Army is massacring civilians, beheading people, and torturing prisoners. And bragging abou - Polidicks

[QUOTE=-n3o-;47327278]I highly doubt that. However, I am interested and curious if the Middle East will ever become peaceful in my life time.[/QUOTE] Most likely not. Too much historical hate for each other is rooted there.

[QUOTE=-n3o-;47327278]I highly doubt that. However, I am interested and curious if the Middle East will ever become peaceful in my life time.[/QUOTE] Hah! And I'll become Prime Minister of Canada.

[QUOTE=-n3o-;47327278]I highly doubt that. However, I am interested and curious if the Middle East will ever become peaceful in my life time.[/QUOTE] Too many reasons to have it not peaceful. Were they all to cooperate they could start dictating stuff on their terms and might be a political force to be reckoned with.

"I Blame the British and French imperialists for all this!" But seriously, how can this possibly ever get better? Is there any right action to make or is the best action in fact inaction?

[QUOTE=adamsz;47327731]"I Blame the British and French imperialists for all this!" But seriously, how can this possibly ever get better? Is there any right action to make or is the best action in fact inaction?[/QUOTE] Well we have option A - Jump in with them slaughtering themselves and get many of our own killed in the process with no peace once we leave Or option B - Not jump in with them slaughtering themselves and not have our own killed and there still be no peace.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;47327750]Well we have option A - Jump in with them slaughtering themselves and get many of our own killed in the process with no peace once we leave Or option B - Not jump in with them slaughtering themselves and not have our own killed and there still be no peace.[/QUOTE] We just can't win

[QUOTE=AlbertWesker;47318891]Remind me again why the government thinks a completely destabilized country can be trusted with our military hardware? :suicide:[/QUOTE] None of the relevant policymakers do. Thank the idiot masses who demanded an immediate end to American presence in Iraq ASAP, regardless of consequences. Iraq wasn't ready to stand on its feet and now we're seeing the result of leaving an unstable, nominally-democratic sectarian government to not only sort out its own political conflicts, but also fight a war against a powerfully aggressive neighbor. And it's not like after fighting there for ten years and supplying the Iraqi military and police we could just ask for it all our hardware back.

[QUOTE=STRIDERS;47332515]We just can't win[/QUOTE] Yeah no shit, it only took people a whole two wars in the Middle East before this idea has actually started to take root. Just leave them to sort their own shit out, at least that way we won't be getting shit in 20 years for getting involved.

[QUOTE=catbarf;47332825]None of the relevant policymakers do. Thank the idiot masses who demanded an immediate end to American presence in Iraq ASAP, regardless of consequences. Iraq wasn't ready to stand on its feet and now we're seeing the result of leaving an unstable, nominally-democratic sectarian government to not only sort out its own political conflicts, but also fight a war against a powerfully aggressive neighbor. And it's not like after fighting there for ten years and supplying the Iraqi military and police we could just ask for it all our hardware back.[/QUOTE] We left because Iraq wanted us out, not necessarily because the US populace did. When has the American government listened to its people?

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;47332996]When has the American government listened to its people?[/QUOTE] Whenever a first-term president wants re-election? What makes you think if we'd elected McCain or Romney that we'd be so far out of Iraq that it'd be falling apart with no attempt at intervention? (that's leaving aside that the old, tired 'the US government never listens to its people' trope never seems to be impacted by the FCC enforcing net neutrality or Congress forcing recognition of climate change or the Supreme Court siding with consumers against corporations or the DoJ investigating the Ferguson PD or any of the other myriad of governmental actions spurred directly by and for the people, but that's neither here nor there, much like the fact that both the US public and many of the Congressmen they've elected have been very much 'GTFO OF IRAQ' for a decade now)

[QUOTE=catbarf;47333034]Whenever a first-term president wants re-election? What makes you think if we'd elected McCain or Romney that we'd be so far out of Iraq that it'd be falling apart with no attempt at intervention? (that's leaving aside that the old, tired 'the US government never listens to its people' trope never seems to be impacted by the FCC enforcing net neutrality or Congress forcing recognition of climate change or the Supreme Court siding with consumers against corporations or the DoJ investigating the Ferguson PD or any of the other myriad of governmental actions spurred directly by and for the people, but that's neither here nor there, much like the fact that both the US public and many of the Congressmen they've elected have been very much 'GTFO OF IRAQ' for a decade now)[/QUOTE] Completely missed my point by miles on end.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;47333072]Completely missed my point by miles on end.[/QUOTE] 'iraq wanted us out and the govt doesn't listen to us' 1. Iraq has no clout. Withdrawal has been largely mandated by the US. The [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S.–Iraq_Status_of_Forces_Agreement"]US-Iraqi SOFA[/URL] was dictated by the US and briefly renegotiated in late 2010, but policymakers decided the original timeline was acceptable. We tried to respect the wishes of the Iraqi government (even as they had sectarian self-interest in mind) but ultimately they were never calling the shots. 2. We elected a president for, amongst other things, the promise to follow the de-escalation plan and drastically reduce involvement in the Middle East. Which, wanting to get re-elected, he followed. You can't blame our withdrawal entirely on an unstable Iraq not wanting continued support, or on an autocratic yet democratic government doing whatever it likes and [I]just so coincidentally happening[/I] to align with what the public has been screaming for for years. We wanted out, we're out, this is the result.

[QUOTE=catbarf;47333113] You can't blame our withdrawal entirely on an unstable Iraq not wanting continued support, or on an autocratic yet democratic government doing whatever it likes and [I]just so coincidentally happening[/I] to align with what the public has been screaming for for years. We wanted out, we're out, this is the result.[/QUOTE] I basically agree, but I'd just add a couple more things: 1. I don't think you can hold the US responsible for the fact that Iraq has been rigged for civil war and eventual breakup since WW1. It's borders exist in complete defiance of the actual ethnic reality on the ground. Something kind of like this was always going to happen as soon as there wasn't an authoritative enough regime in Baghdad to rule through force. Another 20 years of US occupation wouldn't have changed that. 2. Nobody could possibly have foreseen what was going to come out of Syria. The civil war was barely a thing in 2011 when we were withdrawing. How could you possibly predict that Assad's government would lose control of half the country, and the rebellion would spawn a group capable of kicking the Iraqi Army out of some of Iraq's biggest cities? Also, had we stayed, we'd now be locked in another endless ground war with Islamic extremists...how is that better?

[QUOTE=Used Car Salesman;47333213]I basically agree, but I'd just add a couple more things: 1. I don't think you can hold the US responsible for the fact that Iraq has been rigged for civil war and eventual breakup since WW1. It's borders exist in complete defiance of the actual ethnic reality on the ground. Something kind of like this was always going to happen as soon as there wasn't an authoritative enough regime in Baghdad to rule through force. Another 20 years of US occupation wouldn't have changed that. 2. Nobody could possibly have foreseen what was going to come out of Syria. The civil war was barely a thing in 2011 when we were withdrawing. How could you possibly predict that Assad's government would lose control of half the country, and the rebellion would spawn a group capable of kicking the Iraqi Army out of some of Iraq's biggest cities? Also, had we stayed, we'd now be locked in another endless ground war with Islamic extremists...how is that better?[/QUOTE] Hey, I think you're right on both counts, and #1 is why I was strongly against heavy-handed intervention in the first place. But once we were committed to nation-building, we had to stay the course, and all leaving has done has left another weak Middle Eastern democracy to get bulldozed by the next autocracy that comes along. Running in, kicking over the government, and leaving before the new government can get its shit together only makes things worse. Invading was a mistake but we compounded that mistake by leaving Iraq in no position to support itself.

[QUOTE=catbarf;47333271]Hey, I think you're right on both counts, and #1 is why I was strongly against heavy-handed intervention in the first place. But once we were committed to nation-building, we had to stay the course, and all leaving has done has left another weak Middle Eastern democracy to get bulldozed by the next autocracy that comes along. Running in, kicking over the government, and leaving before the new government can get its shit together only makes things worse. Invading was a mistake but we compounded that mistake by leaving Iraq in no position to support itself.[/QUOTE] I'm not arguing that we couldn't have done better and aren't at least partially to blame. I just dunno what, specifically, we could have done differently in 2011 to obtain a better result. We couldn't stay and enforce the peace in a divided country forever. We could have pushed for different leadership, but the Sunnis are opposed to the entire existence of a democratic (and therefore always Shia) government in Baghdad in the first place.