voltaire I appreciate your contributions to this thread. It is a complicated issue and your link and comments are helping me understand it better.
Iraq has perplexed me for quite a few years. Colin Powell warned Bush during the first Gulf war not to invade Iraq. I think he used the phrase, you break it, you bought it. He was so right.
Another point is that the current Iraqi military is basically a patronage operation. So if you join simply to get a nice salary for very little work the natural thing to do is to flee if there is a possibility of danger.
CNN did a really good analysis of ISIS and their weaknesses.
News reports I saw suggested it was the officers who ran away first. An army with no leadership is just a bunch of confused guys with guns. No match for a highly motivated and ruthless bunch of zealots.
For one thing, it’s debatable just how much “their country” it is. Iraq is a creation of the colonialist powers drawing arbitrary lines on a map, and as such it just doesn’t have much nationalist appeal. And the Shi’ite soldiers in question likely don’t have families in those majority-Sunni areas.
Yes, it’s my understanding that the officers have been picked for their political loyalties, not their competence. So, you basically have one side that is organized and highly motivated to fight, and another side that is disorganized and not interested in fighting.
Those that have the balls to defend their country are already fighting against the US.
As for the Iraqi government and its regime…
What kind of people would work with those that invaded their country?
What kind of people would pretend to have free:smack: elections while their country is under… occupation?
The worst kind.
And those that hadn’t choose sides?
They are not gonna go into battle while being led by the worst scum and crooks…
And what about ISIS (or is it ISIL ? )
They didn’t come form Jupiter…
Seeing any of their videos, you can tell they are well trained, and equipped.
And some have “European” physical characteristics (probably from Caucasus region).
So… who gathered them, who trained them, who equipped them…
Wait a minute… could all that lead back to…
And we gave it to them!
The Iraqi people have a nominal government that’s only been around for a few years, and that wasn’t really their idea in the first place. That’s not ‘self-determination.’
And of course, even before our intervention there, Iraq was a Western construct, a product of lines on the map that Europeans drew. ‘Iraq’ isn’t the product of self-determination.
Maybe we should step out of the way and let them do some *actual *self-determination.
Maybe there’s a sentiment that, once there’s a Sunni government established in a Sunni homeland, then the radical government there will be deradicalized by reality, or overcome if it isn’t. Allowing the Baghdad government to be driven out is a necessary step but not the last one, if that’s the thinking.
People on the Right always seem to assume all well-armed militias are loyal patriots ready to fight tyranny in the name of freedom. Sometimes they are just well-armed bands of criminals and religeous lunatics.
That’s exactly what I’m suggesting, with the caveat that they may self-determine to be something we won’t like.