Should Obama Get Involved In Iraq?

August1991 · June 18, 2014

Well, should the US get involved in Iraq, or Syria? Should the US oppose the ISIS now?

Edited June 18, 2014 by August1991

bush_cheney2004 · June 18, 2014

The US is already involved in Iraq, with planned and obligated FY2014 foreign aid to the tune of $500 million. Do you mean more military intervention ?

Edited June 18, 2014 by bush_cheney2004

Remiel · June 18, 2014

The US (and other Western powers) should have gotten involved in Syria before ISIS became a thing. Now I fear it is too late for even the assassination of the Assad brothers (because let us not forget the other one is possibly even a bigger dick) to do any good.

On Guard for Thee · June 19, 2014

The US screwed up going in in '03, and they screwed up even worse getting out. So maybe need to go back and try to right those glaring errors, except not with boots on the ground. Apparently they are already doing recon flights.

Moonlight Graham · June 19, 2014

I don't know about "should", but if Obama admin just lays back and lets radical Islamist militants take over much of Iraq and even Baghdad that's going to be a bad thing for US security (assuming these Islamists wish to harm US and their interests), plus letting them take over is going to make Obama and the US look like complete fools, more than they already are.

Obama is totally screwed, he's had a tough year with Russia in Ukraine and now this crisis to deal with.

On Guard for Thee · June 19, 2014

He inhereted the "agenda from hell" from Bush and he can't seem to catch a break.

RajanRanjan · June 19, 2014

US is already involved in this oil rich country for his long term policy of purchasing raw oil at cheap prices & after refine it, sell it at high prices or use it. This is another business policy but in present senerio of Iraq, terroristial danger is increasing in middle east. This will be dangerous for many countries & will increase lack of oil in many countries. So I think that US should involve in Iraq

eyeball · June 19, 2014

The sooner ISIS creates the Caliphate the sooner human beings living under it will chafe and overthrow it.

The more we interfere with the entirely natural process that is unfolding the more FUBAR things will get...as the case in point proves.

Rue · June 19, 2014

The cruel cold reality is that war between Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds was waged long before Britain created the artificial kingdom of Iraq jamming these three separate tribes into one nation to create a puppet state to appoint one of Faisal's sons as its King as payback for havng Faisal rip up his agreement to live side by side a Jewish state in his Muslim state.

The British created a puppet kingdom to secure their control over oil. The did what they always did. Divide and conquer. Create unstable nations of battling tribes to justify the British remaining to prevent chaos.

Its never ended. The British, then German Nazis, and then Americans tried to control it, and all failed.

It is a dysfunctional nation. It needs to be split into 3 states one Kurdish, one Sunni and the other Shiite to recognize the practical reality of what now exists.

Isis is an uprising against Shiites by Sunnis.

These Muslims hate each other as much as they do the rest of the world for trying to exploit their oil.

What's more bizarre. The throwing away of three trillion dollars in contracts to Haliburton to conduct this war by contract or allowing China to Waltz in and secure all the oil at below market prices?

Bush blew it, Obama blew it. Why now would the Americans go in to protect Chinese oil supplies?

The Americans can not occupy Iraq. Its too large a geographic area.

Air bombings won't do a thing but kill innocent civilians and blow up what they paid so much for Haliburton to build.

The Americans over played there hand staying in Iraq after they took Hussein out. They should have put in a new puppet and got the hell out.

Obama is even more indecisive than Jimmy Carter. He will do nothing but fret behind closed doors. To Obama the world is a dangerous place he won't dare acknowledge. He thinks if he ignores it, it goes away.

Like Woodrow Wilson he is an academic in a world full of sociopathic thugs. He frets over morality as people around him are butchered.

Truman he is not.

Edited June 19, 2014 by Rue

Topaz · June 19, 2014

Normally, I would be against it but those countries who went in there and took out Hussein who kept others out, should now go back and cleanup THEIR mess they created. Many countries have complained about the US, sticking their noses were it shouldn't be. The sad part is going to be all those people that are going to die, on both sides.

-TSS- · June 19, 2014

Perhaps the recent days divulge of news about ISIS is meant to prepare the public for an intervention.

eyeball · June 19, 2014

If the puppet masters really had that much pull don't you think they could also just tell ISIS to tone it down a little?

bush_cheney2004 · June 19, 2014

Where is the UN ? Where is the Arab League ? Where are the "peacekeepers" ?

The Americans were more than happy to stay in Iraq for counter-insurgency operations and training, but no deal could be reached with Iraq for immunity. So President Obama completed the planned 2011 withdrawal and announced a promised fulfilled (by the Bush administration).

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2011/10/201110542732166322.html

Iraq could certainly be occupied again if the U.S. desired, but the main objectives there have already been achieved. Fiscal realities and politics in an election year preclude any huge commitment in the short term. "Yankee Go Home".....be careful what you wish for.

Shady · June 19, 2014

Obama needs to get involved, because the situation there deteriorated because of his foreign policy decisions. This non-action with Syria, and his irresponsible withdrawal in Iraq has directly led to this chaos.

monty16 · June 19, 2014

Obama needs to get involved, because the situation there deteriorated because of his foreign policy decisions. This non-action with Syria, and his irresponsible withdrawal in Iraq has directly led to this chaos.

the situation in Iraq can never be as bad as what the US created and will again create if it gets involved. Even the crazies like Glenn Beck and the Fox News idiots are saying that the US shouldn't get involved again. Although they express it with sick attitudes of "No More", which means no more American lives lost.

That's surely not the issue at this late date and after the experience that cost hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives. Who really cares about how many Americans die while they are in Iraq once again slaughtering the people to keep the oil flowing?

In real life, the US is flying their planes around over Iraq searching for more victims. They'll find them but it's questionable whether they will be ISIS or more Iraqi people.

And finally, if ISIS succeeds then it's quite likely it will succeed in bringing stability back to Iraq's people. The way Saddam had succeeded.

Counterspin that for us with your US propaganda parroting!

dre · June 19, 2014

Obama needs to get involved, because the situation there deteriorated because of his foreign policy decisions. This non-action with Syria, and his irresponsible withdrawal in Iraq has directly led to this chaos.

No the situation deteriorated because of the decision to replace the Baathist government with a shia dominated Iranian proxy. This is exactly what people like you were told would happen, and its also exactly why James Baker and Bush1 didnt roll into Bagdhad after GW1.

monty16 · June 19, 2014

Normally, I would be against it but those countries who went in there and took out Hussein who kept others out, should now go back and cleanup THEIR mess they created. Many countries have complained about the US, sticking their noses were it shouldn't be. The sad part is going to be all those people that are going to die, on both sides.

Here's some "normal" for you. The US will very quickly eclipse the number of deaths caused by ISIS if they go 'in'. I would suggest that your 'normally' would be pretty well what you are now advocating. I would only wonder if you have any real idea of what kind of 'mess' Iraq is in now and if that 'mess' can be increased with more US presence.

The US is now pretending that it will come back and bomb in exchange for Maliki's resignation. In truth they are alredy in Iraq bombing again anyway. One propaganda piece contradicts the next.

Shady · June 19, 2014

No the situation deteriorated because of the decision to replace the Baathist government with a shia dominated Iranian proxy. This is exactly what people like you were told would happen, and its also exactly why James Baker and Bush1 didnt roll into Bagdhad after GW1.

Obama inherited an Iraq going in the right direction, with violence way down and significant security and stability. And for purely political reasons, he squandered all of the progress.

GostHacked · June 19, 2014

Obama inherited an Iraq going in the right direction, with violence way down and significant security and stability. And for purely political reasons, he squandered all of the progress.

But but .. was it not up to those Iraqi's to sort their stuff out?

bush_cheney2004 · June 19, 2014

Obama inherited an Iraq going in the right direction, with violence way down and significant security and stability. And for purely political reasons, he squandered all of the progress.

True....President Obama wanted nothing to do with Iraq as a candidate and even less as U.S. president, preferring to shift resources to be congruent with his Afghanistan policy / rhetoric.

dre · June 19, 2014

Obama inherited an Iraq going in the right direction, with violence way down and significant security and stability. And for purely political reasons, he squandered all of the progress.

Only in whimsical magical Shady land.

The reality is Obama inherited an Iraq where 80 thousand insurgents were being paid not to take up arms, and the Iraqi government stopped paying them. The reality is also that Obama kept troops there for more than a full year LATER than the time table he inherited from Bush to pull troops out. The reality is that the government of Iraq refused to allow the US to extend the mission there.

The reality is that Sunnis and Shia have been at each others throat for thousands of years and absolutely NOTHING the US does is going to change that.

dre · June 19, 2014

True....President Obama wanted nothing to do with Iraq as a candidate and even less as U.S. president, preferring to shift resources to be congruent with his Afghanistan policy / rhetoric.

It was the Iraqi government that wanted US troops gone, and they in accordance with the Status of Forces agreement that Bush signed with Maliki in 2008 which called for the withdrawal of US troops by 2011. Obama actually DID try to renegotiate that SOF agreement but the Iraqi government told him quite literally to go pound sand.

cybercoma · June 19, 2014

Obama needs to get involved, because the situation there deteriorated because of his foreign policy decisions. This non-action with Syria, and his irresponsible withdrawal in Iraq has directly led to this chaos.

Shady · June 19, 2014

It was the Iraqi government that wanted US troops gone, and they in accordance with the Status of Forces agreement that Bush signed with Maliki in 2008 which called for the withdrawal of US troops by 2011. Obama actually DID try to renegotiate that SOF agreement but the Iraqi government told him quite literally to go pound sand.

Not true. It's documented that they didn't try very hard at all to negotiate, because they didn't want to keep troops there. For purely political reasons.