# What should the USA do in Iraq? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 17, 2014, 7:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-should-the-usa-do-in-iraq/690971 "2014-06-17T07:00:17Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2014, 2:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-should-the-usa-do-in-iraq/690971/41 "2014-06-19T14:53:38Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Surely the fighting over control would interfere with the pumping and export, no? Oil workers are tough dudes, but I think they’d hightail it in the face of open battle. And you can’t pump oil by simply praying to Allah. Who in ISIS is going to run the facility? The folks in ISIS might seize the oil fields, but they may find that Atlas is going to shrug on them. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2014, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-should-the-usa-do-in-iraq/690971/42 "2014-06-19T16:27:38Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Surely the fighting over control would interfere with the pumping and export, no? Oil workers are tough dudes, but I think they’d hightail it in the face of open battle. I’m tempted to reply that the fighting can’t go on forever . . . but Syria appears to offer a counterexample. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2014, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-should-the-usa-do-in-iraq/690971/43 "2014-06-19T16:57:35Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > But, where’s the threat? **Whoever** controls those oilfields is going to pump and export the oil, because it’s good for nothing else and it’s too much money to pass up. Not if it is an al Qaeda type terrorist organization. They sell nothing on the legal market. They may smuggle it to someone willing to pay but I don’t know who that might be. It won’t go into international pipelined or go far if the terrorists wish to fly their black flag on an oil tanker on the high seas. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2014, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-should-the-usa-do-in-iraq/690971/44 "2014-06-19T17:04:47Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > But, where’s the threat? My statement (“Today the threat to Iraq’s possession of oil is threatened by al Qaeda terrorists invading the soverign territory of Iraq and challenging the Shia dominated government there.”) is in response to XT in order to point out that there was absolutely no such threat to Iraq’s oil in March 2003 that drove us to invade Iraq. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2014, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-should-the-usa-do-in-iraq/690971/45 "2014-06-19T17:12:45Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > My statement (“Today the threat to Iraq’s possession of oil is threatened by al Qaeda terrorists invading the soverign territory of Iraq and challenging the Shia dominated government there.”) is in response to XT in order to point out that there was absolutely no such threat to Iraq’s oil in March 2003 that drove us to invade Iraq. To be fair to **XT** , he never said there was such a threat in 2003. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2014, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-should-the-usa-do-in-iraq/690971/46 "2014-06-19T17:47:12Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > To be fair to **XT** , he never said there was such a threat in 2003. No he said upthread (“The trouble with the US doing nothing is that the same issues that actually drove us to invade in the first place are still viable. No, not WMD. Oil.”) He says the oil issues today are the same that drove us to invade Iraq in 2003. I know of no reports that Sunni terrorists were marauding and killing their way to Baghdad in 2003. The only invasion of Iraq before March 20 was peaceful UN inspectors. There were no terrorists running amok. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2014, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-should-the-usa-do-in-iraq/690971/47 "2014-06-19T18:04:25Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > Not if it is an al Qaeda type terrorist organization. They sell nothing on the legal market. They may smuggle it to someone willing to pay but I don’t know who that might be. It won’t go into international pipelined or go far if the terrorists wish to fly their black flag on an oil tanker on the high seas. But ISIS can’t afford not to sell it on the legal market. ISIS wants to be a **government.** ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2014, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-should-the-usa-do-in-iraq/690971/48 "2014-06-19T18:06:13Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > He says the oil issues today are the same that drove us to invade Iraq in 2003. There are still oil issues, but they are not the same as in 2003; see link in post #35. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2014, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-should-the-usa-do-in-iraq/690971/49 "2014-06-19T18:32:27Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > No he said upthread (“The trouble with the US doing nothing is that the same issues that actually drove us to invade in the first place are still viable. No, not WMD. Oil.”) > > He says the oil issues today are the same that drove us to invade Iraq in 2003. > > I know of no reports that Sunni terrorists were marauding and killing their way to Baghdad in 2003. > > The only invasion of Iraq before March 20 was peaceful UN inspectors. > > There were no terrorists running amok. The “issue” being referenced is plainly oil, not this specific threat to oil production. Read the sentence you quoted, it’s pretty simple. This shouldn’t be a mystery to you, you asked **XT** if he meant the invasion was over oil, and he confirmed that that was his meaning. ---
**Author:** ![PastTense](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pasttense/32/14550_2.png) [@PastTense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PastTense)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2014, 6:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-should-the-usa-do-in-iraq/690971/50 "2014-06-19T18:37:58Z")
Well Obama decided to send in 300 military advisers. > **[Obama: U.S. Prepared To Send Up To 300 Military Advisers To Iraq](https://www.huffpost.com/entry/obama-iraq_n_5511935)** > > Obama: U.S. Prepared To Send Up To 300 Military Advisers To Iraq “This of course brings to mind JFK and his plan to send some military advisers to Vietnam: On January 28, 1961 JFK approves the plan. In April of 1961 the first of 16,000 Green Beret advisors was sent to Vietnam. Kennedy sends 500 military advisors, a total of 1,400.” > **[JFK and the Vietnam War - 1800 Words | 123 Help Me](https://www.123helpme.com/essay/JFK-and-the-Vietnam-War-157189)** > > JOHN F. KENNEDY IN VIETNAM There are many critical questions surrounding United States involvement in Vietnam. American entry to Vietnam was a series of many... How long will it take for Obama and the next President to catch up with Kennedy and Johnson? This is a major mistake and will alienate millions of Sunnis from the U.S. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_stamos_left_ear/32/3198_2.png) [@John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Stamos_Left_Ear)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2014, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-should-the-usa-do-in-iraq/690971/51 "2014-06-19T20:33:12Z")
Why is it that when the best course of action is to do nothing that it is politically impossible to do just that? ---
**Author:** ![Steken](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e274bd/32.png) [@Steken](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steken)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2014, 9:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-should-the-usa-do-in-iraq/690971/52 "2014-06-19T21:30:06Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > But ISIS can’t afford not to sell it on the legal market. ISIS wants to be a **government.** This reminds me. [This](http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/06/isis-iraq-twitter-social-media-strategy/372856/) article mentions, in passing, that “the question of when and how to declare a new caliphate is highly controversial in jihadi circles.” I’m guessing that it might, perhaps, be roughly analogous to a (nominally) communist country declaring “we have achieved communism,” in the [original Marxist meaning of the term](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marx's_theory_of_history#Communism) - in short, the movement’s ultimate goal. Bringing it back to ISIS, though: Do we know anything about when the group might declare that “yep, we did it - what we have right here is a caliphate”? When / if they take Baghdad? Damascus? Jerusalem? Or is it more of a maximalist “all-lands-that-have-ever-been-under-Muslim-rule” type of thing? Of course their name seems to indicate that they’d be happy with “just” Iraq and the Levant, but maybe that’s more of a “… for now” sort of thing? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2014, 9:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-should-the-usa-do-in-iraq/690971/53 "2014-06-19T21:47:27Z")
> [@John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](#): > > Why is it that when the best course of action is to do nothing that it is politically impossible to do just that? 1. It’s debatable that the best option is to do nothing. I think it is, but I could be wrong. 2. Why is it politically impossible to “do nothing”? Obama is doing next to nothing, but I don’t think whatever he’s doing is politically motivated. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2014, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-should-the-usa-do-in-iraq/690971/54 "2014-06-19T23:41:59Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > The “issue” being referenced is plainly oil, not this specific threat to oil production. Here is what XT wrote; (“The trouble with the US doing nothing is that the same issues that actually drove us to invade in the first place are still viable. No, not WMD. Oil.”) He says the ‘same issues’ are ‘still viable’ and its ‘Oil.’ And whatever ‘issues’ that are supposedly the ‘same’ are what ‘drove us to invade’ in 2003 instead of ‘doing nothing’. And now according to XT ‘trouble with the US doing nothing’ today is because what ‘drove’ us to invade in 2003 is a ‘viable’ issue today. In trying to defend XT, are you saying there are issues involving Iraq’s oil that ‘drove us to invasion’ on the one hand but had nothing to do with a threat to our economic or national security on the other. I have stated that there was nothing that ‘drove us to invasion’ - it was a deliberate choice in no response to a threat of any kind. Are you saying the threat from ISIS today to Iraq’s oil is not part of XT’s special analysis? What ‘same’ ‘issues’ about Iraq’s oil could ‘drive’ our nation to starting a war? Do tell. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2014, 1:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-should-the-usa-do-in-iraq/690971/55 "2014-06-20T01:33:55Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > There are still oil issues, but they are not the same as in 2003; see link in post #35. Here is what XT wrote; (“The trouble with the US doing nothing is that the same issues that actually drove us to invade in the first place are still viable. No, not WMD. Oil.”) Yes I agree. They are not the same. But XT says the same issues that drove us to invade are still viable. Here is what XT wrote; (“The trouble with the US doing nothing is that the same issues that actually drove us to invade in the first place are still viable. No, not WMD. Oil.”) ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2014, 3:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-should-the-usa-do-in-iraq/690971/56 "2014-06-20T03:16:12Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > (“The trouble with the US doing nothing is that the same issues that actually drove us to invade in the first place are still viable. No, not WMD. Oil.”) Cheney, who controlled Bush, stood to make money from oil and Halliburton. Obama, for all his faults, does not. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2014, 3:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-should-the-usa-do-in-iraq/690971/57 "2014-06-20T03:31:00Z")
> [@carnivorousplant](#): > > Cheney, who controlled Bush, stood to make money from oil and Halliburton. But where is the oil issue today that matches the oil issue of 2003, that drove us to invade Iraq back then? ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2014, 12:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-should-the-usa-do-in-iraq/690971/58 "2014-06-20T12:08:01Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > Here is what XT wrote; (“The trouble with the US doing nothing is that the same issues that actually drove us to invade in the first place are still viable. No, not WMD. Oil.”) > > He says the ‘same issues’ are ‘still viable’ and its ‘Oil.’ And whatever ‘issues’ that are supposedly the ‘same’ are what ‘drove us to invade’ in 2003 instead of ‘doing nothing’. And now according to XT ‘trouble with the US doing nothing’ today is because what ‘drove’ us to invade in 2003 is a ‘viable’ issue today. > > In trying to defend XT, are you saying there are issues involving Iraq’s oil that ‘drove us to invasion’ on the one hand but had nothing to do with a threat to our economic or national security on the other. > > I have stated that there was nothing that ‘drove us to invasion’ - it was a deliberate choice in no response to a threat of any kind. Are you saying the threat from ISIS today to Iraq’s oil is not part of XT’s special analysis? > > What ‘same’ ‘issues’ about Iraq’s oil could ‘drive’ our nation to starting a war? Do tell. I took him to mean that the “issue” was lack of U.S. control of Iraqi oil. Obviously, my ability to give you his true meaning is limited. But that’s what I understood him to be saying: the U.S. invaded to control Iraq’s oil, so losing control of it now (in the form of a semi-friendly government losing control of it) might provoke a similar response. I also submit that you’re being overly literal with the “drove” thing. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2014, 12:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-should-the-usa-do-in-iraq/690971/59 "2014-06-20T12:49:29Z")
> [@carnivorousplant](#): > > Cheney, who controlled Bush, stood to make money from oil and Halliburton. Can you elaborate on this? Specifics, please. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2014, 1:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-should-the-usa-do-in-iraq/690971/60 "2014-06-20T13:10:13Z")
Iraq Violence: Government Forces Prepare To Strike Back At Sunni Islamists After Obama Offers Military Advisers Isra’ al-Rubei’iReuters06/20/14 04:24 AM ET > [@](#): > > BAGHDAD, June 20 (Reuters) - Iraqi forces were massing north of Baghdad on Friday, aiming to strike back at Sunni Islamists whose drive toward the capital prompted the United States to send military advisers to stiffen government resistance. > > President Barack Obama offered up to 300 Americans to help coordinate the fight. But he held off granting a request for air strikes from the Shi’ite-led government and renewed a call for Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki to do more to overcome sectarian divisions that have fueled resentment among the Sunni minority. > > In the area around Samarra, on the main highway 100 km (60 miles) north of Baghdad, which has become a frontline of the battle with the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, the provincial governor, a rare Sunni supporter of Maliki, told cheering troops they would now force ISIL and its allies back. > **[Iraqi Forces Prepare To Strike Back At Sunni Islamists](https://www.huffpost.com/entry/iraq-violence-preparing-for-battle-against-isis_n_5514054)** > > Iraqi Forces Prepare To Strike Back At Sunni Islamists Will US public lose interest and then press as Iraqi government troops and Shiite Milita’s launch a counter-offense and begin to drive the terrorists back to Syria? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-should-the-usa-do-in-iraq/690971.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-should-the-usa-do-in-iraq/690971.md?page=4)