This morning I heard on the radio a Debbie Lee the parent of a soldier killed in Iraq and she was basically calling for American troops to return to the Middle East to in effect to ‘finish the job’. What I heard was on UK radio and I don’t have a recording but the video at this link will give you a flavour of what she’s saying http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2015/05/20/press-ignores-soldiers-who-fought-and-won-ramadi-debbie-lee-speaks-out The argument she seemed to be giving reminded me of what some (especially on the right) said about the US defeat in Vietnam, that if only the troops had been allowed to do their job and had not been let down by the ‘politicians’ then they could have ‘won’. And again this struck me as naive in the extreme, in both cases the outcomes were not that simple – the problems were if anything the fault of original faulty premises. In Vietnam a nationalist ant-colonial movement was seen as an evil communist plot to take over the world (remember the domino theory). In Iraq it was the belief that simply taking out Saddam could and would allow The Bush Admin to set up a free market based US style democratic state. Both viewpoints where mainly ideologically based (rather than based on a cool analysis of reality) and in many ways doomed the two enterprises from the beginning. And so the stance she is taking seems disingenuous at best - because Mrs Lee only seems to be attacking the Obama Admin and not the real problem which was the huge fuck up that was caused by the Bush Jr Administration’s pursuit of a fantasy. And that might possibly be because she to have chosen a similar fantasy that having Iraq War 3 would correct the mistakes of the past. The thing is that by the end the US presence in Iraq didn’t seem to be wanted by the majority of the American people and by the people that had come to political control in Iraq, because a lot of the problems that many predicted would happen if the US invaded and occupied the country, happened.
Makes me wonder what 'finishing the job' would look like. Does she intend a long term occupation? Because if not, what would stop it all blowing up again the minute the troops left? To me it seems that the military interventions have only served to further destabilize the region and empower fanatics, as well as huge loss of life and all the other negative consequences of war.
Perhaps we should just let the semites finish the "job" themselves. Euros would be wise to sit back and watch semetic lands self destruct. Please pass the popcorn. A simpler world sans achmed and isadore.
in all fairness this woman is grieving, she isn't thinking rationally. Her son's death probably seems meaningless because of the fruitlessness of the Iraq war. She's looking for a way to justify his death.
Sorry but is what she doing dignified grieving or using the death of a son to promote a viewpoint? She argues that the invasion of Iraq was right and just because she thinks there were WMD’s and that Suddam supported Al Qaeda. She also seems to argue that the occupation was a success and if only US troops had stayed things would have been fine. Try this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAOg3gHRrps
So she's just ill informed and presumably not very bright? Why does radio give people of that caliber the time of day? Why are we?
Her son died in 2006 in the city of Ramadi... Over the weekend .. The State Department is sharing new details about the deadly fighting in Ramadi, Iraq, last Sunday, saying the city fell into ISIS hands after the militant group set off 30 suicide car bombs in the city center, 10 of which each were comparable in power to the Oklahoma City truck bomb of 1995.
Yesterday, ISIS captured the strategically important city of Palmyra in Syria. It appears that our strategy of relying on airstrikes is failing, but I certainly don't want the US to return to Iraq, that god-forsaken country. Doesn't it seem that no one in power in America knows what to do? For so long, we counted on training the Iraqi army to take over and now it is obvious they can't be trained. It's a very fucked up situation.
McFuddy I’m not sure what is meant by ‘people of that caliber’ - as to been misinformed well no-one seems to be challenger her on it. As to why I’m given her the time of day well it’s because she was given time on the BBC this morning, and I’m trying to work out how widespread are the views she was spouting. I mean she claims that she knows personally a number of the Republican presidential candidates. Here is an appearance on Fox with Sean Hannity where Bush is praised for his insight and as a lover of his troops and it is declared that the ‘war was won’ in Iraq. http://uneditedpolitics.com/debbie-lee-interview-with-sean-hannity-mother-of-fallen-navy-seal-on-the-fall-of-ramadi/
It was fucked up going into Iraq thinking it would be a ‘piece of cake’ setting it up as a stable free market loving democracy, that would be a strategic centre for US policy and secure US oil needs. People in power don’t know what to do because events especially the ‘fuck ups’ in the Middle East over some 50 years and especially the recent western adventures in Iraq and Afghanistan have made things very difficult to do. Couple that with a dysfunctional and impotent global political system (UN anyone) and what you get is this crap. Was the US public up for going into Syria early the UK public wasn’t, now all the moderate rebel leaders there are dead. To me this is shaping up to be a equivalent to Europe’s wars of religion, in the thirty years war alone “Germany's population was reduced by 30% on average. In the territory of Brandenburg, the losses had amounted to half, while in some areas an estimated two thirds of the population died. The population of the Czech lands declined by a third. The Swedish armies alone destroyed 2,000 castles, 18,000 villages and 1,500 towns in Germany, one-third of all German towns. Huge damage was done to monasteries, churches and other religious institutions” What happened then is what is happening know in the Middle East the ebb and flow of war would wash over towns and cities, they pass hands from one faction to the other over and over, each time the cost would be blood, destruction and death.
My agenda can beat up your agenda. (to be continued.) Blood, misery,usurpation, death and money trumps everything. We need to --blah-blah-blah. And then we can -blah-blah-blah. and let's change -blah-blah-blah- Relax. and BUY MORE. BUY MORE NOW.
I agree she seems ill informed but she doesn’t seem to be the only one. You would think that the fuck up that was the US lead involvement in Iraq would be imprinted on people’s minds but that doesn’t seem to be the case. But I remember here that many at first defended Bush jr Admin’s invasion and occupation but by the end they just didn’t post any more, and I think there is the problem – they didn’t change their minds they just could defend their views so they didn’t post. I think many thought it was the right thing to do but it was badly executed by Bush and so it’s just a matter of going back and doing it right this time. But as I’ve said that viewpoint it based on a false premise – which is that Iraq is a nation and is full of Iraqis The problem is that Iraq has never really existed as a nation, before 1918 it had been part of an empire; basically the British invented the Kingdom of Iraq carving it out of the Ottoman Empire after the Turks were defeated in WWI It has Kurdish, Sunni and Shia areas and under Saddam the Sunni were on top and often persecuted the Shia and Kurds, when Saddam lost the first gulf war the Kurds went autonomous and after he was deposed the Shia grow in power and began harassing the Sunni.
People like Debbie Lee seem to be demanding action but what – Send US troops back into Iraq? I’m not sure that has popular support in the US Give the Iraqi government’s army more guns and equipment But just seems to be a way of arming ISIS when the Iraqi army run Bomb ISIS This just seems like the US is supporting the Shia against the Sunni and with heavy Iranian influence in the Iraqi government – you’d be helping Iran to gain more power and influence in area. Assist the Kurds and give them guns and equipment Turkey hates the Kurds more than it does ISIS and you need Turkish help. The Kurds would say thanks and take over the land they conquered (they do dream of having their own state). It would piss off both the Sunni and Shia and the Kurdish government in Iraqi Kurdistan may be a little too left wing for US government tastes. * Given this it not that surprising the US government doesn’t seem to know what to do.
Given that IS have just taken Palmyra, I'd question if the bombing has any real effect in preventing their expansion.
It did save a lot of people in the past. It all depends on the exact bombing of course. Not every bombing has the same success. But it is better then doing nothing or sending ground troops. Adding ground troops to fight IS would seem a good way to stop their expansion, but why in earth should it be american troops? IF sunni iraqi's have a problem with shia iraqi's fighting IS to get a city like Ramadi back (not sure how uniform they have a problem with that) should the west really send soldiers to fight and die for them? Is it better to support the official army of Iraq with modern weapons which they repeatedly have lost to IS, or is it more worthwile to support the (iraqi, not turkish) Kurds with those weapons, or dare I say, even those shia militions? Well, ideally they should not be given out to a particular group of people like kurds or just shia militions but to a unified front against IS. Which THEY should form!
I agree in general. I don't think any more western troops should be deployed. I do think it's unlikely that sunni and shia will ever bury their differences to the extent of forming a united anti IS coalition. I really don't know how this is going to get solved.
Not before the iraqi people unify first anyway. But then the west could still support them in other ways then by sending troops. Maybe there need to be even more sunni's to get tortured, raped and killed by IS before they realize help from their shia brothers is better than no help
