I care less about the money than about the people killed and maimed. Don’t forget that the one reason the casualty rate was as low as it is was our improved battlefield medical treatment. Few killed, many more maimed. YMMV.
At any rate, $500M isn’t going to get rid of ISIL in Syria. And I don’t see that it’s going to tip the hand of the so-called moderate rebels. Assad just needs to go to The Great Patron in Moscow for help or an even bigger hand-out.
You would have to be convinced that ISIS has no outside help to be able to launch this assault on Iraq in the first place to consider 300 US troops sent into help being evidence that Iraq was not self reliant in 2011 when all American troops were pulled out.
Is America no longer self reliant when it get foreign help on intelligence and criminal investigations.
Does America have its own self interest in helping Iraq’s military destroy this Vermin that invaded Iraq on June 10 2014?
Is the US not self-reliant for having Iraq’s Army do the ground fighting against an international terrorist threat that invaded Iraq from Syria?
It is happening ‘now’ as you said. You said Obama either lied or was unaware of the unstable condition of Iraq three years ago when he pulled all the troops out.
Note the tense of the verb “to see” in the first sentence. Past tense. If I wanted to refer to what is happening now in Iraq, I would have said “what we are seeing…” I’m sure most posters here understand that I was referring to the violence we SAW in Iraq in the years immediately after the deposing of SH. That violence peaked in 2006/2007. Syria, as some of us know, has even more ethnic division than Iraq does.
So far, Civil War II hasn’t escalated to the level of Civil War I, but we’ll have to see how this plays out. Many a ME expert likens Iraq to Humpty Dumpty. There is an eerie parallel to what we’re seeing in the ME today and what saw almost exactly 100 years ago in Europe.
I am referring to your statement “I never said Obama should have seen this attack coming.” In order to show you that you certainly did.
You have now defined the 2006 sectarian violence in Iraq as a playground spat if the shit hits the fan in Syria when Assad falls. To me that means the current problems in Iraq would thus far be considered by you to be a slumber party pillow fight.
When did we find out that a large portion of Iraq’s Defense Forces were not capable to maintain stability in Iraq? Had so many ISF troops not shed their uniforms and ran away from the first major challenge in mid June this year you would not have been able to post you insidious accusation against the President that he was either lying or did not know what he was talking about. Why and how could you make your claim if ISIS did not attack the way they did or if the ISF had stood their ground and were driven back in the immediate three days if battle.
Based upon your original inflammatory claim about Obama it has to be in your mind had the latter occurred you would have to say Obama was telling the truth when he said he was leaving a “capable Iraqi Defense Force behind”.
Look. I am not going to continue this absurd hijack. If you want to claim I said “X”, you need to quote where I said “X”. As far as I’m concerned, this subject is closed. Do the other posters in this thread a favor and drop it.
This question I asked is too much for you. Duly Noted.
“When did we find out that a large portion of Iraq’s Defense Forces were not capable to maintain stability in Iraq?”
The answer is not in 2011 when Obama honestly and truthfully addressed the troops. Obama was not lying about the capacity of the Iraq Army in 2011. That is a fact that has overwhelmed you at this point. So I will drop it as you wish.
Financial Support had to come from somewhere. I can tell you that it most likely was not the Government of Iraq or Iran. Perhaps all the original fighters in ISIS came in with all their own resources and money and weapons and such, but I doubt that. That leaves outside help from places other than Iraq.