Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The Islamic State group's takeover of Ramadi is stark evidence that Iraqi forces lack the "will to fight," Defense Secretary Ash Carter said, in the harshest assessment yet from a high-ranking Obama administration official of the U.S. effort to bolster Iraqi forces to retake their territory from extremist militants.
Iraqi soldiers "vastly outnumbered" their opposition in the capital of Anbar province but quickly withdrew from the city in Iraq's Sunni heartland, Carter said on CNN's "State of the Union." The interview aired on Sunday.
The Iraqis left behind large numbers of U.S.-supplied vehicles, including several tanks.
And get a load of this:
Quote:
Rep. Adam Kinzinger, a Republican, called for the president to send in U.S. ground troops, a recommendation increasingly made by Republicans.
"We're not really engaged in this fight," he said. "This is a cancer that's growing in the Middle East. This is now a house on fire in a densely packed neighborhood, where it's going to extend to other places."
And the official who says this thinks the solution is to send them more arms, Humvees and tanks so they can once again leave them behind only to be bombed by our F-16s. This is absolute insanity.
Even with them outnumbering ISIS they high tailed it and ran. They have no desire to fight and are basically a bunch of cowards and are illiterate. Why should the US send more troops and lose more lives if the people will not defend their own country? Why are we fighting a religious war that we cannot win? We need to keep our troops out of the Middle East and let the Arab countries fight their own wars. We have no business meddling in a religious war. ISIS is convincing the people there way is the only way. How ISIS controls life from birth to foosball - CNN.com
Even with them outnumbering ISIS they high tailed it and ran. They have no desire to fight and are basically a bunch of cowards and are illiterate. Why should the US send more troops and lose more lives if the people will not defend their own country? Why are we fighting a religious war that we cannot win? We need to keep our troops out of the Middle East and let the Arab countries fight their own wars. We have no business meddling in a religious war. ISIS is convincing the people there way is the only way. How ISIS controls life from birth to foosball - CNN.com
The problem is that an ISIS run Iraq could become another Afghanistan which nurtures terrorism and leads to future attacks on the USA. So, as the argument goes, better to fight them there than here in the USA.
Of course, our big mistake was to have got rid of Saddam. He understood the like of ISIS and understood how to deal with them. Brutal and inhumane though it was, Saddam was effective.
I don't think we should send troops because I don't think the US has the stomach for the kind of war that is needed to put an end to ISIS once and for all.
I think we should pull out of the region and let them redraw their country's borders which were established rather randomly after WWII with no real thought put into religious and ethnic considerations.
We suck at war with an enemy who has no borders, but we can wipe out an established country pretty quickly.
If Isis can establish a Caliphate, with borders, and leaders, that's our ball game.
This guerrilla warfare stuff is how we became a country in the first place. It's hard to defeat an enemy you can't find.
I think we should pull out of the region and let them redraw their country's borders which were established rather randomly after WWII with no real thought put into religious and ethnic considerations.
We suck at war with an enemy who has no borders, but we can wipe out an established country pretty quickly.
If Isis can establish a Caliphate, with borders, and leaders, that's our ball game.
This guerrilla warfare stuff is how we became a country in the first place. It's hard to defeat an enemy you can't find.
This might present a problem for conservatives in the sense that should they wish to offer continued funding and support to an overseas group that "lack the will to fight", how does that square with their efforts to stand on the necks of people in this country that they characterize as lacking the will to work or take responsibility for the situation they find themselves in? In other words, it's OK to spend vast amounts of money on people who fold and are unwilling to stand up for their own freedom but not OK to offer assistance to Americans who, for whatever reason, need economic help.
I hope some sharp journalist points out the disconnect and elicits a response.
Of course, our big mistake was to have got rid of Saddam.
Thank God the future president learned his lessons and kept Gaddafi in place. Necons wanted to repeat the Saddam experience and he said no.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
