U.S. war gains in Iraq now lost or threatened

When the last U.S. combat troops departed Iraq in December 2011, they left behind a defeated al-Qaeda and an Iraq where traditional rivals Sunni and Shiite Muslims were sharing power in the world's only Arab democracy.

Two years later, al-Qaeda has seized major cities where hundreds of U.S. troops died while fighting alongside their Iraqi brethren. The population once freed by the U.S.-Iraqi alliance has now watched those same jihadist insurgents return to command the streets and impose their will…

But Kagan says what Obama fails to grasp is that the national security of the United States is at risk if Iraq fails to defeat al-Qaeda and succeed as a democracy. The Iraq war sent a message to the Arab world that the United States would stand with Muslim partners in this cause.

"That commitment was lost when we withdrew all our forces," Kagan says. It declared the new president's disinterest in the Arab world, and sent Iraqis and other Arabs in the region a new message: "You're on your own."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...raq-war-gains-now-lost-or-threatened/4393439/​

Today in Iraq the al-Qaeda flag flies over Fallujah.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2014/01/iraq-fallujah-al-qaeda-20141702218689268.html​

Way to go Obama! Oh you must be so proud! Mark my words. Iraq will blow-up into a deadly threat to the US and American troops will once again have to invade Iraq (starting from scratch) since Obama gave away every, and all gains from the Iraq war. Then no doubt Democrats will blame Republicans for getting us into another war, and spending all the money needed to protect the US A-G-A-I-N!

 

How is a Iraq going to become a threat to the US? I honestly almost spit soda on the screen when I read that line. What we really need to do is just stay the hell out of there. Clearly they don't care enough about democracy to defend and nothing we can do militarily will change that.

 

Bush handled it all wrong from the beginning. We should have turn Afghanistan to glass. Then we tell the world the next time an Islamic group attacks America we'll do the same to Mecca.

 

There was never anything to be gained from invading Iraq in the first place. Well, Cheney's pals got rich, so I guess that's something.

 

Oh, dunno. What harm could al-Qaeda do? What harm would they like to do? Wake up and quite putting others in harm's way because of your naivety.

 

I'm putting no one in harms way, I'm not the one demanding we send soldiers over to foreign nations because of a small non-nation group that cannot be defeated by conventional means.

 

Really... We didn't bomb the Vatican because of the Mafia.

 

Lol , yeah because invading Iraq and spending a trillion plus dollars doing so has eliminated al-Qaeda....

 

If al-Qaeda is allowed to "set up shop" out in the open in any country they will become stronger, and use that country as a base of operations as they did in Afghanistan. If they are forced to operate "under cover" much of their energies will be used to survive instead of harming others. Soon they will own Iraq like they did Afghanistan.

 

Agreed, at least Tora Bora and we did. The problem was there were more Islamic fundamentalist that just couldn't get to the fight. Afghanistan is hard to get to, for us and them. The solution was Iraq, better ground to fight on easier to resupply (ports are big with projecting power) and more important, easier for the fundamentalist to get to. Worked perfectly, they came in hordes and we killed them in hordes.

Better ground.

Cheers
Labour

 

Apples to oranges

 

If we didn't meddle in the 1st place Al quaeda could not set up shop in Iraq.

So what does the OP suggest? We become the defacto gov't in Iraq and place permanent military base there?

 

Actually I was trying to be nice.. Bombing Mecca is a real stupid idea.

 

Absolute correct. Iraq was the perfect base in the middle of all the trouble. Obama gave it away!

- - - Updated - - -

We STILL have bases in Germany and Japan decades later... That IS how it is done...

 

In your opinion.

 

I happen to be a Christian so murder for its own sake is repulsive to me.

 

I'm sorry but this is such a horrible argument that it's hard to address. AQ already operates in the open. Look at Syria as a great example. They are the rebels we've been supporting (yes, we've been arming Al-Qaeda for some reason). Due to NSA tracking I don't much feel like going into deep research regarding AQ however they were hardly locked into Afghanistan. They have bases of operation all over the middle east and Africa. They were moving fighters from places like Somalia to Iraq to help fight the US/Iraqi forces. You don't seem to understand that they do what they want because they operate all over the world in isolated groups that don't rely on each other for their individual success.

I'm also not sure why you think a consolidated gathering point would make them more of a threat to us. First off it would make it easier for us to observe/destroy them as we would know exactly where to hit. The only thing that stops us from destroying them at this point is a lack of will and international borders (which is likely why they are in Pakistan rather than Taliban controlled Afghanistan). Second even if they did consolidate that doesn't mean they're going to be able to better launch attacks against us. The reason attacks against us are rare is because of the resources (you need people who can get into first world nations) and because such attacks are pointless. Why spend resources trying to find and train people to attack the US when you could use the same resources to get a few pissed off dirt farmers to take over a few villages and impose your will on them (like is happening now in Syria).

You need to take a look at what is going on vs the fantasy of international terrorists who will stop at nothing to attack us. They may hate us, but they are not a real threat to us. If we start seeing daily, hell monthly terrorist attacks then there may be reason to worry, but that's not the case. Going back to Iraq would cost us more in money and lives than AQ could hope to do on their own.

 

The third world dirt farmers turned terrorist aren't the issue, the smart people who are able to enter first would nations like the US and the homegrown terrorists are the issue, and they're exceedingly rare.

 

Oh , well I sure if you explained that to the Islamic radicals they'll stop murdering people in the name of their religion.

 

Don't underestimate your enemy that's fatal.

The list of Al Qaeda attacks was growing through the 80's and 90's, the territory they operated in was and is widening and their numbers were and are now growing. So was the sophistication and technical skill involved. These are no farmers.

Cheers
Labour

 

Do you want to kill all Christians because some are criminals?

 

Where did I say kill all Muslims?

 

There was also 1 AQ attack on US soil in the 80s/90s. Go to now (so include 9/11) and there have been 2. Both were focused on the World Trade Center. There were a few more attacks around the world, some in first world nations, many out in the third world/mid east, some the hit US citizens/servicemen, some that hit foreigners. While we certainly need to watch them and attempt to stop their rare attacks, they are not worth going into third world nations and "nation building."

Anyway back to my main point while they may have people with some skills, the point still stands that the average AQ operative cannot make it to the US. Those are the people to be worried about. It doesn't matter how skilled you are if you can't get to your target.

 

I had to assume you know the significance of Mecca to a billion Muslims around the world.

 

Absolutely I do.