Audit of Iraq Civil War

Truth stands the test of time, deception does not.

On 06.11.2014, Iraq’s appeal to President Obama for a military response have so far been rebuffed by the White House (1).  It is now 06.21.2014 and Obama still has not ordered essential airstrikes and he is unlikely to do that (2).

Ten days of lost opportunity have now passed and the Al Qaeda Sunni force is on the march to Baghdad (1, 2).  It is now only a matter of perhaps one week before Baghdad will be under siege with essential supplies cut-off.

Why no airstrikes?  That was a horrible mistake made by President Obama et al and makes me question his real agenda.  It defies common sense and puts the loss of Maliki’s Iraq as a dangerous possibility.

Per CNN 06.21.2014, ISIS militants have surged from … Syria to blitz major cities in Iraq’s northern Sunni region, taking Tal Afar and Mosul, then moving quickly south.   (3)

Hundreds of thousands of civilians fled from their path, creating a new refugee crisis.  [ISAS has] … advanced on Baquba, just north of Baghdad, and are threatening to attack the capital.  (3)

The Obama administration has said there will be no more American boots on the  ground … 300 high-ranking officers, Seals and Rangers… aren’t going to be combat troops.  Their job will be to gather intelligence [only].  (3)

They’ll be sitting in offices, not out on the front lines, and they’ll be looking at the maps,” said retired Lt. Col. Douglas Ollivant…Should they be there?  That depends on whom you ask.  Ret. Col. Doug MacGregor says no. He says it’s a largely meaningless gesture.  So, they’re sort of holed up, giving advice. It would be unwise to put them on the front lines, where ISIS could capture them. (3)

Policy experts are now stating: All other arguments aside, the West should not militarily intervene in Iraq. Regardless of what might be said by politicians, Iraqi or not, Western intervention to aid Baghdad in the fight against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) does not constitute a solution to the current crisis, nor does it work towards one.  (2)

Far from it: direct military intervention by a Western state (even if Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki is requesting it) would dramatically worsen the situation, and ISIS, contrary to what pro-interventionists might say, would inevitably come out on top.  (2)

Reference 2, suggests that the western powers may want the Maliki regime to go away and be replaced by Sunni leadership.   Otherwise, air strikes would have been past tense and the Sunnis crushed already, right?

Saddam was the last leader of the Sunnis.  Saddam part two is now coming.

Is Obama thinking about the underlying very complex and gravely important Iraqi tactical and strategic military decisions that must be made, else Baghdad will soon fall and a massive emergency evacuation of US personnel will occur?

When Baghdad comes under siege, those 300 advisors will likely have their orders changed from advising Iraq how best to attack and instead plan for the safe evacuation of personnel and coordinating air strikes to allow that to occur.  

How could anyone have not seen this coming?  

Retired Col. Doug MacGregor said those 300 are largely a meaningless gesture (3).  

Lessons learned: One can be excellent at citing stories, but lacking in skepticism and critical thinking skills.  

Don’t trust anyone.  Always verify what others assert.

references:

1.  http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/12/world/middleeast/iraq-asked-us-for-airstrikes-on-militants-officials-say.html?_r=0

2.  http://edition.cnn.com/2014/06/20/opinion/cooper-quilliam-west-ignore-iraq-intervention-plea/index.html?hpt=hp_c1

3.  http://edition.cnn.com/2014/06/20/politics/iraq-advisers/index.html?hpt=hp_t1