Is Obama doing the right thing?

[LucidElement]

Has Obama done the right thing by pulling out the U.S troops.. ISIS has just captured another 4 towns closet to Baghdad. I know many people will say its not our war and that is the truth. However, many innocent people are getting slaughtered by the hundreds over there by these insurgents. Now it is said that ISIS has found Saddam's chemical weapons. Half of me feels like the insurgents were waiting for the US to pull out so they could do their thing (which they are doing) and the other half of me believes that these insurgents know that Obama will just sit back and watch. I think the right thing to do would be go in and save these innocent people that are getting killed from just being in "the way." Many people don't want Boots on the ground, but if its to save hundreds and hundreds of more innocent people then its worth it. More importantly, the last 10 years have been spent over in Iraq keeping the peace, and now all of a sudden its chaotic right when we leave.... I'm interested in hearing everyone's thoughts about this. Im on the fence, I can see both sides to the matter regarding U.S involvement. Do people thing it could start a massive mainstream war between the two sides?

[spartan max2]

The Iraq government wouldn't allow us to have troops their. He told us to leave. Sooooo I mean what where we suppose to do?

And I feel you, I really do. But my problem is if we stayd for how long would we stay? It just looks like we have to leave the region alone or stay forever. The country dosent seem determined enough to fight for its own freedom so why should we?

How long are you willing to have our people die in a country fighting for something the people do not even seem to want to fight for? The countries government kicked us out. And The sad truth is we funded the weapons that the Isis has. Because we funded the Syrian rebels(because we just had to protect all the innocents in Syria, funny how that came back to bite us). You know because the Syrian government was also soooo evil. We fund all sides in the region and wonder why they dislike us. I would be all for helping if the region actual had support for a real democracy but they simply do not.

We tried to establish a western style government in a region whose cultural and political landscape we barley understand.

Edited June 22, 2014 by spartan max2

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

Unless you are willing to keep 50,000 peacekeeper troops there forever, then give it up!! Don't go back to that hell hole.

[Big Jim]

My concern is with sending in advisors. Since the Iraqi army has already ditched their uniforms and deserted en masse, just who are we supposed to be advising? Is there some kind of agreement that our 300 soldiers are just advisors and therefore are not to be shot at? Of course not. So as soon as they are attacked they are no longer just advisors but of necessity they must become combatants. Now they are a very small army in hostile territory and vastly outnumbered. When they are wiped out do we send 300 more? I don't claim to know the answer but I can see problems with the current plan. The other concern I have is with the different culture's sense of time. As Americans, we want quick fixes. Even WW2 only lasted a few years. These people have been fighting for 1000 years and we want to end it in a month. Or maybe a few years. What we don't seem to understand is that we could keep the peace for a generation or more and as soon as we leave it would start again. So in the end what have we gained? There are some things that are just unfixable and there are other things that are not our problem. The trouble in the middle east seems to be both. If at all possible we need to apply wisdom where force has not worked.

Edited June 22, 2014 by Big Jim

[Imaginarynumber1]

. I think the right thing to do would be go in and save these innocent people that are getting killed from just being in "the way."

Okay. Then we also need to go to Myanmar (Burma), Central African Republic, Darfur, Congo, hell, most of Africa, etc.

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

Big Jim said: "What we don't seem to understand is that we could keep the peace for a generation or more and as soon as we leave it would start again. So in the end what have we gained?"

Not only have we not "gained" anything, we have lost a MOUNTAIN of $$$$ and a lot of US troops.

I'm not inclined to see the fruitless exercise being repeated.

[Frank Merton]

Without intervention you will soon have a radical Sunni state in Iraq actively building weapons of mass destruction, which will guarantee that the Shiite state in Iran will do the same (if it isn't already). Probably the first casualty will be New York City.

With intervention you have US troops bogged down in a tar pool indefinitely costing thousands of lives and billions of dollars.

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

Okay. Then we also need to go to Myanmar (Burma), Central African Republic, Darfur, Congo, hell, most of Africa, etc.

It wasn't that long ago in Rwanda, when the Hutu majority killed somewhere up to one million Tutsi minority people.

the US did absolutely NOTHING

Ditto, for when madman Idi Amin dada of Kenya had his genocidal ways, as well. And again, NOTHING from the US.

It seems we just prefer to screw around with ME Muslims a whole lot more. Gee, I wonder why?

[Frank Merton]

Two wrongs don't make a right. I can't see how it is that people try to justify failure to act in one situation because a previous administration didn't in another.

By the way, the answer to your question is not oil. That is an illusion.

[LucidElement]

The Iraq government wouldn't allow us to have troops their. He told us to leave. Sooooo I mean what where we suppose to do?

And I feel you, I really do. But my problem is if we stayd for how long would we stay? It just looks like we have to leave the region alone or stay forever. The country dosent seem determined enough to fight for its own freedom so why should we?

How long are you willing to have our people die in a country fighting for something the people do not even seem to want to fight for? The countries government kicked us out. And The sad truth is we funded the weapons that the Isis has. Because we funded the Syrian rebels(because we just had to protect all the innocents in Syria, funny how that came back to bite us). You know because the Syrian government was also soooo evil. We fund all sides in the region and wonder why they dislike us. I would be all for helping if the region actual had support for a real democracy but they simply do not.

We tried to establish a western style government in a region whose cultural and political landscape we barley understand.

I hear ya 100% however, but one line you said that i BOLD'ed is the people cant fight a civil war against those who are more advanced then them.. The world is like a pyramid.. (in more depth) these insurgents are bullying people who have absolutely nothing, people who cant protect themselves if they wanted to. These insurgents are killing individuals who dont speak the right language or anything... Yes, Syria (AL-ASSAD) said he didnt use gas to kill his own people.. but you know what.. all these middle-eastern presidents and rebel armies seem to be joining up to run over the weaker ones... And as a republican, as an American i dont find that right.... It p***es me off to know the Iraqis have ducked and hid this entire time until we pulled out, and now they are killing innocent bystanders to try and gain reputation and ground. The sad truth is Americans may or may not die fighting that fight, but I can tell you, that no where near as many american militants would die in the long run as how many innocent kids and familes are being lined up and shot in Iraq..... But on the other half i understand what your saying about the length of time.. we may have to stay there for a long while, it may never end.. god its like a SEE-SAW

[LucidElement]

My concern is with sending in advisors. Since the Iraqi army has already ditched their uniforms and deserted en masse, just who are we supposed to be advising? Is there some kind of agreement that our 300 soldiers are just advisors and therefore are not to be shot at? Of course not. So as soon as they are attacked they are no longer just advisors but of necessity they must become combatants. Now they are a very small army in hostile territory and vastly outnumbered. When they are wiped out do we send 300 more? I don't claim to know the answer but I can see problems with the current plan. The other concern I have is with the different culture's sense of time. As Americans, we want quick fixes. Even WW2 only lasted a few years. These people have been fighting for 1000 years and we want to end it in a month. Or maybe a few years. What we don't seem to understand is that we could keep the peace for a generation or more and as soon as we leave it would start again. So in the end what have we gained? There are some things that are just unfixable and there are other things that are not our problem. The trouble in the middle east seems to be both. If at all possible we need to apply wisdom where force has not worked.

Hey Big Jim, you made some good points boss. But These insurgents HATE AMERICA, they have tried to kill us through terror attacks..Dont you think that ISIS may get so big if they capture IRAQ (which they are doing slowly but surely within the last few weeks) that they will cause harm to other countries (Allied countries/Nato)

[LucidElement]

Okay. Then we also need to go to Myanmar (Burma), Central African Republic, Darfur, Congo, hell, most of Africa, etc.

Yes many people are dying in those countries from Miltiant groups. But those countries to not and have not EVER opposed a threat on AMERICAN Soil... IRAQ and the MIddle East has. ISIS is gaining territory by killing many people and taking over these towns and cities trying reclaim the country as a whole.

[Imaginarynumber1]

Yes many people are dying in those countries from Miltiant groups. But those countries to not and have not EVER opposed a threat on AMERICAN Soil... IRAQ and the MIddle East has. ISIS is gaining territory by killing many people and taking over these towns and cities trying reclaim the country as a whole.

You originally said that we should help the innocents. There are just as many, if not more, innocents in those other areas. Now you're saying we should go in because they're a threat to a!America. Which is it?

It's a religous civil war. We have no reason to be involved.

[LucidElement]

Without intervention you will soon have a radical Sunni state in Iraq actively building weapons of mass destruction, which will guarantee that the Shiite state in Iran will do the same (if it isn't already). Probably the first casualty will be New York City.

With intervention you have US troops bogged down in a tar pool indefinitely costing thousands of lives and billions of dollars.

Its a war that many U.S Militants will fight for to save the lives of innocent people in IRAQ.. Are you from Vietnam? My brother in law and a few of my good friends would love a chance to go oversees again and bring back the peace to many innocent people who are being killed. ISIS are bullies and could be stopped easily.

[LucidElement]

I want to say a couple things before I heard to bed. First off, Obama avoids conflicts at all costs, I'd say thats a liberal way of thinking (but its not at all times) Obama is a different character, has a different way of thinking, completely different person then anyone who has sat in the oval office as everyone has seen, Both Liberals and Republicans. Obama he has gone against the constitution numerous times, and more importantly he just smacks other countries with SANCTIONS.. such as Russia.. But OBAMA recently stated "It's good to be president because I can do whatever I want." And boy he sure has proved it going against congress numerous times. (he is like teflon).. I guess im confused when he said last week that there will be know boots on the ground in Iraq and all of sudden a couple days ago he said he will put 300 boots on the ground... And what really upsets me is what he said about this Iraq situation the other day ""Rather than try to play Whac-a-Mole wherever these terrorist organizations may pop up," Obama said, "what we have to do is to be able to build effective partnerships, make sure that they have capacity.""

PARTNERSHIPS REALLY???? Is that why he let 5 terrorists free? whatever happened to not negotiating with terrorists?

[Frank Merton]

Its a war that many U.S Militants will fight for to save the lives of innocent people in IRAQ.. Are you from Vietnam? My brother in law and a few of my good friends would love a chance to go oversees again and bring back the peace to many innocent people who are being killed. ISIS are bullies and could be stopped easily.

I hope you are right that ISIS can be stopped easily, but the present Iraqi government seems incompetent. If it weren't for the Saudis I think the country would now be an Iranian province. At least the south.

Yes I am Vietnamese and live in HCMC. I grew up here but was able to go to college in the States. Then about twenty years ago when Vietnam began opening up again I was able to use my language skills to get a job for an American company and until I had to retire last year traveled widely in the States. (Technically I haven't retired but my health for the present doesn't allow travel. Instead I do some work via computer. My employer is being very nice to me, as it seems obvious I will never be able to go back to full time work).

[+and-then]

Without intervention you will soon have a radical Sunni state in Iraq actively building weapons of mass destruction, which will guarantee that the Shiite state in Iran will do the same (if it isn't already). Probably the first casualty will be New York City.

With intervention you have US troops bogged down in a tar pool indefinitely costing thousands of lives and billions of dollars.

Precisely. I believe we should monitor the situation carefully and when they build camps or other infrastructure that can be used to train troops to use against us here at home we should destroy it. As often as they rebuild we should continue to destroy and harass them. It is a war and unless we prosecute it as such we will eventually face another 9-11 style action - only potentially FAR worse.

[LucidElement]

You originally said that we should help the innocents. There are just as many, if not more, innocents in those other areas. Now you're saying we should go in because they're a threat to a!America. Which is it?

It's a religous civil war. We have no reason to be involved.

Yes the innocents being the towns people in Iraq, the threat are the insurgents. Your talking about Africa (which everyone knows has militia running rampant.) However, this is the middle-east forum and that's a completely different topic.(which i could talk to you about for a long time). But, The Insurgents in Iraq are killing many more in the last few weeks then the militants in African villages. Its off the charts whats going on right now.

[LucidElement]

I hope you are right that ISIS can be stopped easily, but the present Iraqi government seems incompetent. If it weren't for the Saudis I think the country would now be an Iranian province. At least the south.

Yes I am Vietnamese and live in HCMC. I grew up here but was able to go to college in the States. Then about twenty years ago when Vietnam began opening up again I was able to use my language skills to get a job for an American company and until I had to retire last year traveled widely in the States. (Technically I haven't retired but my health for the present doesn't allow travel. Instead I do some work via computer. My employer is being very nice to me, as it seems obvious I will never be able to go back to full time work).

Awesome, where in the states did you go to College? which state is your favorite? off-topic i know but just cuirous =)

[Frank Merton]

Awesome, where in the states did you go to College? which state is your favorite? off-topic i know but just cuirous =)

See PM

[spartan max2]

I hear ya 100% however, but one line you said that i BOLD'ed is the people cant fight a civil war against those who are more advanced then them.. The world is like a pyramid.. (in more depth) these insurgents are bullying people who have absolutely nothing, people who cant protect themselves if they wanted to. These insurgents are killing individuals who dont speak the right language or anything... Yes, Syria (AL-ASSAD) said he didnt use gas to kill his own people.. but you know what.. all these middle-eastern presidents and rebel armies seem to be joining up to run over the weaker ones... And as a republican, as an American i dont find that right.... It p***es me off to know the Iraqis have ducked and hid this entire time until we pulled out, and now they are killing innocent bystanders to try and gain reputation and ground. The sad truth is Americans may or may not die fighting that fight, but I can tell you, that no where near as many american militants would die in the long run as how many innocent kids and familes are being lined up and shot in Iraq..... But on the other half i understand what your saying about the length of time.. we may have to stay there for a long while, it may never end.. god its like a SEE-SAW

Vietnam seemed to of pulled it off. We recently gave Iraq like six F-16. We have been giving them money and weapons for years. If anything Iraq is more advanced. But it would require their troops to actually stay and fight.

And like I said earlier Iraq told our military to go home. We cant force people to be a type of government they do not want.

We gave weapons to the people who are now attacking Iraq so that they could overthrow the evil Syrian government(who we also gave lots of money to) Do you want to continue this cycle?

How do you propose we save the innocents over there? We need a clear objective. We kick the ISIS out then go home and they will jsut come back. If we dont go home they will just attack the rest of the region and then wait tell we leave. For as long as Iraqs own people do not want a democracy then they will not get one. There is no other way

[Frank Merton]

I think a very large majority of the Iraqi people would love to have a democracy and an end to all the fighting and terror, but they can't enforce it and as things are there is no one else to enforce it.

[spartan max2]

I think a very large majority of the Iraqi people would love to have a democracy and an end to all the fighting and terror, but they can't enforce it and as things are there is no one else to enforce it.

Im sure alot of them do. But If they are not willing to fight for it then why should we fight for them? if enough of the population put a effort to enforcing it then they could kick all the radicals out and actual do it. We gave them money and troops for years to get them ready

Edited June 22, 2014 by spartan max2

[Frank Merton]

Im sure alot of them do. But If they are not willing to fight for it then why should we fight for them? if enough of the population put a effort to enforcing it then they could kick all the radicals out and actual do it. We gave them money and troops for years to get them ready

What you say is well taken; I just imagine when dealing with brutal serious terrorists that most of us would come up lacking that way.

[+and-then]

What you say is well taken; I just imagine when dealing with brutal serious terrorists that most of us would come up lacking that way.

I agree, it would be a hard thing to put one's family in jeopardy to fight against such evil. But when taking the long view I hoped enough of them would see that this was their best chance - maybe their only chance to break the cycle of strongman leaders. It's a tragedy and I would love to see these vicious thugs routed but if no significant number of Iraqis are willing to stand a post then ultimately we can do no good there. I suspect that the region will be fractured along ethnic lines and fights over the oil will go on for years unless a true strongman rises who can be seen as Caliph.