What should the West do about the present situation in Iraq?

[John_Mace]

@CarnalK

Istm that with the chaos in Iraq formally declaring independence is unnecessary. They are already making bilateral agreements with Turkey bypassing Baghdad. Trade between Turkey and Kurdistan is over 8 billion already.

@XT

Be a bit like Taiwan and China really if they keep it informal, I guess.

Yeah, I think all parties would just as well not rock the boat. But who knows?

[Sage_Rat]

@NotfooledbyW

This makes sense:

The simple and fundamental fact is that this is the fallout of the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Any analysis that doesn’t grapple with and accept that basic fact is just wrong and possibly dishonest to boot. It’s not about how President Obama organized the exit from Iraq, whether he did it well or poorly.

On the Cusp of the Deluge - TPM – Talking Points Memo

It doesn’t entirely make sense.

At the end of the day, Obama did have a role in what is happening in Iraq. If he had chosen to withdraw all troops, the day he was first elected, people could evaluate him as a person and as a president based on this choice and the impact it had. If he chose to stick through and control Iraq as the conquered territory of the Great American Empire, again, we would eventually evaluate him and his presidency on those terms.

Bush is (largely) to blame for the history of the Iraqi people starting from 2003. Obama is (significantly) to blame for the history of the Iraqi people starting from 2009. Neither of this is an irrelevant discussion. They’re just different discussions.

[The_Fornicator]

He campaigned on pulling out, he had that mandate.

[BrainGlutton]

@The_Fornicator

He campaigned on pulling out, he had that mandate.

And that is always a dangerous promise to break . . .

[NotfooledbyW]

@Sage_Rat

Obama is (significantly) to blame for the history of the Iraqi people starting from 2009.

Was Obama elected President of Iraq too in 2008? Iraq was a soverign nation in 2009 I thought. How is Obama to blame for the history of the Iraqi people. He had no power over them. Was he to overthrow Malik and the legislature and reverse the exit that Bush his damn self negotiated with the soveriegn nation of Iraq?

[Steken]

@Laggard

Ok, does ISIS try and move into Baghdad or not? Opinions?

They might try, yes, but the Shi’ite militias will almost certainly beat them back.

They might perhaps manage to take Samarra, and torch its Shi’ite shrines, but I can’t see them getting much further south than that.

[NotfooledbyW]

@Diceman

As I opened my internet browser, I was greeted with a Breaking News banner that said "Obama tells Iraqi leaders to ‘Solve their own problems.’ "

Is this the Obama quote you are taking out of context:

" So the United States will do our part, but understand that ultimately it’s up to the Iraqis, as a sovereign nation, to solve their problems."

Key word ‘ultimately’ … Do you dissagree and if you do - when do you sign up to go fight for Iraqis so they don’t have to solve the problems they have to ultimately resolve themselves.
Did your browser drop this half of Obama’s statement? (“So the United States will do our part” " or did you just not bother to read the full quote?

[Sage_Rat]

@NotfooledbyW

Was Obama elected President of Iraq too in 2008? Iraq was a soverign nation in 2009 I thought. How is Obama to blame for the history of the Iraqi people. He had no power over them. Was he to overthrow Malik and the legislature and reverse the exit that Bush his damn self negotiated with the soveriegn nation of Iraq?

So your position is that the Commander in Chief of the United States of America had about as much power to influence the course of history of the Iraqi state between the years 2009 and today as a goat herder in Zimbabwe?

[CarnalK]

Please don’t get into an Obama argument with NotfooledbyW. He’ll simply never stop.

[Sage_Rat]

I took a hiatus of most-of-two-years, so I’m a bit behind. I’ll presume that it’s best to head your advice.

[Oakminster]

Another vote for staying out of it. We came to the party uninvited and already drunk, ran over the cat, hit two cars, parked in the garden, puked in the punchbowl, clogged the toilet, beat up a fat kid, and pissed on the sofa. It’s time to pass out naked on the lawn and hope one of our friends will drive us home.

[marshmallow]

Do nothing? I’d expect nothing less from a bunch of cut and runners. We have to fight them over there so we don’t fight them over here. Unlike you racists I believe Arabs are ready for freedom and democracy. Do you guys love (Googles…) Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi? They’ll greet us as liberators and the oil will pay for it anyway. We need to flood the area with more troops. Call it a surge, if you will. Someone write this down!

Whoa, sorry. Had a flashback there. All the old talking points came out at once. Why is my nose bleeding…

[NotfooledbyW]

@Sage_Rat

Obama is (significantly) to blame for the history of the Iraqi people starting from 2009.

@NotfooledbyW

Was Obama elected President of Iraq too in 2008? Iraq was a soverign nation in 2009 I thought. How is Obama to blame for the history of the Iraqi people. He had no power over them. Was he to overthrow Malik and the legislature and reverse the exit that Bush his damn self negotiated with the soveriegn nation of Iraq?

@Sage_Rat

So your position is that the Commander in Chief of the United States of America had about as much power to influence the course of history of the Iraqi state between the years 2009 and today as a goat herder in Zimbabwe?

No need to overthink what you think my position might be.

You chose to use the words ‘significantly to blame’ so I asked you (How is Obama to blame for the history of the Iraqi people.) You said he is to blame significantly for the history of the Iraqi people since 2009. Can you explain why you think that?

Because Obama commands the most powerful military in the history of the world does not mean he has a right to violate the sovereignty of Iraq like Bush did in 2003. And the most powerful military on earth cannot change the reality on the ground if the Iraqis can’t reach a fundamental political compromise that’s needed to have a functioning state. There is no ‘blame’ but to the uncompromising Iraqis since Bush negotiated the timeline for US military withdrawal at the end of 2009.

Obama just used his influence when he said, “So the United States will do our part, but understand that ultimately it’s up to the Iraqis, as a sovereign nation, to solve their problems.”

After a decade of assisting Iraq to build up its military - is Obama somehow to blame for 30,000 Iraqi soldiers running at the first sign of a fight against a couple thousand terrorists rolling in from Syria?

So no, Obama has no more influence than a ‘goat herder in Zimbabwe’ to convince thirty thousand Iraqi fighters to stand and fight. Or to get Maliki to commit to real compromise with the Sunni population.

[NotfooledbyW]

Obama’s influence may payoff:
From the following report:

"Asked on Thursday about Iranian comments, U.S. State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said: “Clearly, we’ve encouraged them in many cases to play a constructive role.”
Alarmed by unrest in Iraq, Iran open to shared role with US, Iran official saysJun 13th 2014 12:48PM

By Parisa Hafezi ANKARA (Reuters) - Shi’te Muslim Iran is so alarmed by Sunni insurgent gains in Iraq that it may be willing to cooperate with Washington in helping Baghdad fight back, a senior Iranian official told Reuters.

The idea is being discussed internally among the Islamic Republic’s leadership, the senior Iranian official told Reuters, speaking on condition of anonymity. The official had no word on whether the idea had been raised with any other party.

Officials say Iran will send its neighbor advisers and weaponry, although probably not troops, to help its ally Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki check what Tehran sees as a profound threat to regional stability, officials and analysts say.

Now if we could get McCain, and Rush Limbaugh to shut up.

[levdrakon]

The US and Iran working together, Iran coming to Iraq’s rescue, Kurds maintaining peace and security… did I die and wake up in Star Trekia?

[NotfooledbyW]

@levdrakon

The US and Iran working together, Iran coming to Iraq’s rescue, Kurds maintaining peace and security… did I die and wake up in Star Trekia?

It is a positive way forward and just a reminder that Iran cooperated with the Bush Administration during the early days of the military operation in Afghanistan.
I would like to hear Muqtada al Sadr’s opinion on the need for US airstrikes resuming in Iraq.

I have a hunch his Mahdi Army would not require it if they get back to operational strength.

[GIGObuster]

@levdrakon

The US and Iran working together, Iran coming to Iraq’s rescue, Kurds maintaining peace and security… did I die and wake up in Star Trekia?

In Deep Space 9 to be more precise.

[NotfooledbyW]

@Sage_Rat

I never thought Bush seemed bright enough nor strong enough to accomplish much good. If he attacks a country ruled by a guy who killed a million of his own people, I can live with that. And I would have voted (if I had voted) for him in his last election, just to see that Iraq wasn’t abandoned.

Sorry, it may not be possible to discuss the best way forward for US involvement in Iraq today with someone who may still believe that Bush attacked (in violation of international law) Iraq because Saddam killed a million of his own people.

But being ok with an attack on a sovereign nation ordered by someone not considered to be bright enough to accomplish much good seems to be illogical to me.

Being that far off on a fundamental aspect of the US invasion of Iraq in the first place makes an informative discussion about what should be done today a tall order.

[XT]

[QUOTE=NotfooledbyW]
I would like to hear Muqtada al Sadr’s opinion on the need for US airstrikes resuming in Iraq.
[/QUOTE]

No, he probably doesn’t think that the US needs to be involved any more than ObL thought the US should be involved in the first Gulf War. I’m good with the US staying out of this thing, but I’m not sure Sadr’s the best judge of what’s needed.

I have a hunch his Mahdi Army would not require it if they get back to operational strength.

Um, sure. And if you want to see the levels of blood shed and sectarian violence one ups-man-ship seen in Afghanistan after the Soviets tucked tail then that’s probably exactly the sort of rat fuck you’d get by letting the various militias off the leash and off the reservation with no limit on their bag count.

This is going to be brutal and ugly, but you almost seem gleeful at the prospect of adding more to it. So, we’ll have MULTIPLE blood thirsty militia/terrorist groups to counter balance each other…sounds like a great plan!

[NotfooledbyW]

@XT

I’m good with the US staying out of this thing, but I’m not sure Sadr’s the best judge of what’s needed.

I’m not saying he’s the best judge. I’m interested in hearing his views on the matter today.

I’m saying he’s a better judge of what’s needed than John McCain, Lindsay Graham or Rush Limbaugh at least because he is an Iraq and a an Iraqi nationalist.

Here’s what caught my eye on Sadr and Petraeus in 2007.

U.S. seeks pact with Shiite militia

The military is in talks with elements of cleric Sadr’s powerful group, which is accused of attacks against soldiers but which holds sway in much of Baghdad and parts of Iraq. By Ned Parker, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer September 12, 2007

BAGHDAD – – U.S. diplomats and military officers have been in talks with members of the armed movement loyal to Muqtada Sadr, a sharp reversal of policy and a grudging recognition that the radical Shiite cleric holds a dominant position in much of Baghdad and other parts of Iraq.

and this:

You’re not going to kill or capture all of the Sadr militia anymore than we are going to kill or capture all the insurgents in Iraq," Petraeus said. “Some of this is a little bit distasteful. It’s not easy sitting across the table, let’s say, or drinking tea with someone whose tribal members may have shot at our forces or in fact drawn the blood – killed our forces.”

And this a few months later:

While in Washington to brief Congress on the situation in Iraq, General Petraeus called Sadr’s following a “legitimate political movement” and said Sadr should not be “backed into a corner from which there is no alternative.”

U.S. hopes to counter Mahdi Army's clout in Baghdad