It’s all politics. Trying to remove politics from the complexities of the Middle East (or any region of the world) is silly and self-defeating.
What “solution” do you want us to formulate? A ground war is not going to happen - the American people are not willing to tolerate an effort of the size and scale necessary to fully and permanently secure Iraq, and the UN would never approve of such an action anyway. Airstrikes can only do so much. There’s no guarantee that arms deliveries won’t just end up in the hands of different extremists. All you seem to be doing is spouting the same vague old talking points about how Obama needs to “show leadership” and “put politics aside” as if only the Republican party and the rest of the world would instantly fall in line if only he stated his point in firm enough language, ignoring the reality that there are plenty of people who stand ready to criticize Obama and say he’s wrong no matter what solution he offers.
There isn’t a straight forward solution. We had an opportunity back in 2007 to setup a gov (not elect, it had to be formed and created by us) that included Sunnis and Shiites. General Petraeus had reached out the the Sunni tribes and they aided us in fighting Al Qaeda. We secured an important Sunni region in Iraq. A lot of promises were made and broken by the US. A lot of those Sunni leaders were let down. I suspect some of them are in ISIS today.
There’s no clean and nice way of dealing with this. Trying to go in and broker a democracy in that region was so incredibly naive. That’s a legacy left to us by G. Bush. It’s broke now and there’s no fix.
I wish we could just ignore the region. Let them kill and rape each other. But, some of those ISIS members are Americans and they will be bringing the battle home to America. Some will be arrested and stopped. Others will get back here and I dread what they will do.
It used to be that politics ended at the shoreline, but Republicans hate Obama a whole lot more than they love the US. What’s the rush? Let’s assess the threat, then figure out what can be done about it, what it might accomplish, what it won’t accomplish, what are the risks, who should do it, etc.
What’s to fear? That handfuls of Americans are going to come back and wreck havoc? Perhaps we just watch them when and if they return to the US.
I suspect our great nation will somehow manage to survive the embarrassment.
I think aceplace57 wants a POTUS who’s a bit more like this.
I’m not at all convinced that such a government would have been anything other than a mess.
Sounds like a good reason to stay out.
This is one of the same arguments used by Bush and Cheney. I seen no reason why it’s a better argument now. I don’t buy that we have to fight them there so we don’t fight them here – we lost more US lives fighting in Iraq than we did on 9/11. If we get in there again, we’ll probably lose more US lives than we would from any risk of attacks at home.
Further, ISIS wants us to invade. Let’s not do what our enemies want, for a change.
That did happen, but al-Maliki took power from his cohorts and gradually took more dictatorial control for himself and favored the Shia. What happened next will amaze you.
So what do you think should happen? The US goes in there with some allies, kicks ISIS’ butt, and then… ?
<Bolding mine.>
Nevertheless, this is somehow Obama’s fault because “show leadership!”?
Is this OP about anything other than an unwillingness to accept that the world is a complicated place and that not all problems are trivial or have a solution that ends up with the American hero blowing up the enemy in his escape plane at the end of the 2 hour matinee?
He should talk real tough cause it’ll make us feel better about ourselves!
Are you uniting with our president?
Strong Leadership sometimes appears as being “detached.” Personally, I sleep much better knowing Obama is at the helm.
That’s the ticket. The president doesn’t have time for things like hobbies, or exercise, or family obligations, or sleep. The sole duty of the president is to sit upright at the Resolute Desk 24 hours a day, in a state of catlike readiness, prepared to leap up the moment a crisis emerges so he can Show Leadership.
I’m not convinced populist “Grr, down with our enemies!” rhetoric is particularly brave. It seems… easy.
For example, it’s better to wait and put together a comprehensive solution and look “detached” instead of blundering ahead without a plan because people are frantically demanding action - any action, without a clue of the details or the consequences.
Now we’re talking!
I feel like if the media just stopped reporting on the Middle East, then everything would just work itself out. Naive, sure, but really, that region gets far too much publicity. It really seems to feed on all that attention.
Having spent some time there, I can say that American media most definitely blows things out of proportion.
But that’s where Jesus was born!
It wouldn’t, as there were all sorts of wars in the region long before the modern media existed. This is so silly it might even top “we will follow them to the gates of hell until they are brought to justice,” which raises some real legal and theological questions.
There’s probably downsides to letting terrorists set the president’s schedule.
Maybe you should read up on the 2008 Status of Forces Agreement that set the terms of our withdrawal from Iraq.
The short version:
Are you saying we should have remained in Iraq whether the Iraqi government we created wanted us there or not, in violation of its sovereignty? (America - fuck, yeah! We don’t ask permission - we just go where we want!)
Excellent summary.
This cracked me up. Brilliant.
…In an appropriately dark coloured suit.