The Battle for Ramadi

Warrigal

Warrigal

SF VIP
Location
Sydney, Australia
The US is reportedly sending 450 more "trainers" to Iraq.


The Obama administration is sending 450 more U.S. military personnel to help Iraq's military as it tries to take back the city of Ramadi from the terrorist group ISIS, a senior administration official confirmed to NBC News — a move the White House emphasized is not "boots on the ground" by another name.

"To improve the capabilities and effectiveness of partners on the ground, the president authorized the deployment of up to 450 additional U.S. military personnel to train, advise, and assist Iraqi Security Forces at Taqaddum military base in eastern Anbar province," according to a statement by the White House released Wednesday.

"The president made this decision after a request from Prime Minister Haider Al-Abadi and upon the recommendation of [Defense] Secretary [Ash] Carter and [Joint Chiefs of Staff] Chairman [Martin] Dempsey, and with the unanimous support of his national security team."

The U.S. troops will not serve in a combat role and will augment the more than 3,000 U.S. troops who have already deployed to Iraq, according to administration officials. The first wave moving to the Taqaddum base will be forces already in country on the ground, and then the administration will pull additional forces from out of country to that site.

U.S. forces are already training Iraqi forces at the al-Assad air base, which is west of Ramadi. This brings the total number of U.S. forces up to 3,550 authorized across Iraq — in an advisory, training and support role, the Pentagon confirmed Wednesday.

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/is...g-sending-more-military-trainers-iraq-n372656
Click to expand...

I heard some discussion on this this morning on the radio and the opinion was expressed that if the Iraqis aren't prepared to fight for their country they should not be supported/trained indefinitely.

What say you all about this development? Necessary but limited response or the thin edge of the wedge?
I'm still waiting to hear whether Australia will commit more personnel to this cause.
I'm sure our PM will want to, if only for the press conference.
 

Told ya. Our PM is talking tough on terrorism and ISIS.

http://www.9news.com.au/national/2015/06/11/16/20/australia-weighs-up-iraq-boost

Australia weighs up Iraq boost

Australia is talking with coalition partners about a possible boost to its involvement in Iraq, Prime Minister Tony Abbott says.

Opening a summit on countering violent extremism in Sydney, Mr Abbott said the Islamic State terror group could not be negotiated with, only fought.
"We are talking with our friends and partners about how the air strikes might be more effective and how the Iraqi forces might be better helped," Mr Abbott said.
Australia is the second-largest single contributor to the fight against IS in Iraq, providing 300 trainers based in Taji, an air task group and special forces on a counter-terrorism advise-and-assist mission in western Anbar.

Chief of Joint Operations, Vice Admiral David Johnston, declined to say what his advice would be to the government about future force numbers.
"The (current) campaign is the right campaign," he told reporters in Canberra on Thursday. "That is what the Iraqi government wants."

He admitted IS, or Daesh, forces remained a capable and determined enemy and were proving difficult to contain. "We are still not at the point where we see Daesh in retreat," he said.

The huge losses at the start of Daesh's push across Iraq - which saw about 70,000 Iraqi military killed - were still resonating in terms of the national military's leadership and willingness to fight. While RAAF Hornet bombers have flown more than 600 sorties, on three-quarters of occasions they have returned without using any weapons, mainly due to Daesh choosing to embed their fighters with civilians.

The capturing of US vehicles by Daesh has also made targeting difficult. To date, no Australian air strikes have resulted in civilian deaths.

It is understood a revised Australian plan could include more "spotters" to make these air strikes more effective. The joint Australian-New Zealand training mission in Iraq is due to deliver its first Iraqi forces graduates at the end of the month. They will head into operations soon after.

Colonel Mark Galton, who is in charge of the Taji task group, said many of the Iraqis had entered the course with only "basic skills" but had taken to the training very well.

Read more at http://www.9news.com.au/national/2015/06/11/16/20/australia-weighs-up-iraq-boost#Ct8gXTrKexJzOAO8.99
Click to expand...
 
I think that when we sent them to Vietnam that they were called advisors...:confused:
 

Obama is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. Remember he has repeatedly asked Congress to debate the situation and we hear crickets up on Capital Hill. Yet there are all sorts of "arm chair POTUSs" on talk radio and TV.. Exactly what is the answer?
 
"If the Iraqi's aren't prepared to fight for their own country, etc."

We have spent 100's of Billions, and destroyed the lives of thousands of our own troops to prepare the Iraqi's to fend for themselves....apparently in Vain. The Middle East is a quagmire of quicksand that can only suck us in deeper and deeper. ISIS is now very well armed with billions of dollars of US military equipment that the Iraqi troops abandoned.

One of the definitions of Insanity is "doing the same things over and over, and expecting the results to be different".
 
Don M. said:
"If the Iraqi's aren't prepared to fight for their own country, etc."

We have spent 100's of Billions, and destroyed the lives of thousands of our own troops to prepare the Iraqi's to fend for themselves....apparently in Vain. The Middle East is a quagmire of quicksand that can only suck us in deeper and deeper. ISIS is now very well armed with billions of dollars of US military equipment that the Iraqi troops abandoned.

One of the definitions of Insanity is "doing the same things over and over, and expecting the results to be different".
Click to expand...

I agree, but if we do nothing and Iran (as in Shia) take over Sunni territory and... does who knows what... and Iraq falls apart.. and THE SKY IS FALLING... and what about Israel???? See?

Here's the thing.. I think we have to stop thinking that Iraq is a country. It was a PHONY country invented by the British in 1919. It was held together by the despot Saddam Hussein, who is gone now thanks to GW and friends... Iraq is actually three maybe four countries.. Sunni, Shiite and Kurds.. perhaps some other tribes.. Let them form their own boundaries and elect their own leaders... ENOUGH!
 
IMO, our policy should be one of "containment" where these Islamic Fools are allowed to tear each other apart, until they begin to come to their senses and decide to join the 21st century. Insofar as Israel is concerned, based upon past history, the Israeli's seem to have no trouble winning any confrontation with the Arabs.
 
Don M. said:
IMO, our policy should be one of "containment" where these Islamic Fools are allowed to tear each other apart, until they begin to come to their senses and decide to join the 21st century. Insofar as Israel is concerned, based upon past history, the Israeli's seem to have no trouble winning any confrontation with the Arabs.
Click to expand...

Absolutely... contain them... but how without sending troops?

As for Israel.. I also agree.. but Israel is used as a red herring and a political hammer by the Right... and an election is coming up... soooooooooooooo
 
"Contain them...but how"?

The last time I checked, we have billions of dollars invested in things like Aircraft carriers and drones, etc. If these Fanatics want to tear Iraq and Syria apart, so be it. However, if they set one foot outside of those boundaries, we utilize our resources to blown them to tiny bits.
 
Don M. said:
"Contain them...but how"?

The last time I checked, we have billions of dollars invested in things like Aircraft carriers and drones, etc. If these Fanatics want to tear Iraq and Syria apart, so be it. However, if they set one foot outside of those boundaries, we utilize our resources to blown them to tiny bits.
Click to expand...

I suppose...that's one way of looking at it. So they step into say.. Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Lebanon.. we just start lobbing missals into those countries?
 
Obama doesn't want to be the president that will have to go to Dover Air Force Base to attend the U.S soldiers body bags back home, so he will not commit our troop to combat while President. IN a way he's very smart to leave this decision to the next President.
This doesn't change my mind as I STILL don't care for him as President.
 
Davey Jones said:
Obama doesn't want to be the president that will have to go to Dover Air Force Base to attend the U.S soldiers body bags back home, so he will not commit our troop to combat while President. IN a way he's very smart to leave this decision to the next President.
This doesn't change my mind as I STILL don't care for him as President.
Click to expand...

And you think that's a BAD thing? I think it's a good thing.. and that he is a great President for wanting to keep us out of this "clusterfutch" as much as possible. Can you imagine if Bush or one of his hawkish buddies were president.. We'd have to double the size of Dover to accommodate all our dead kids. I''m praying our next President feels the very same way.
 
QuickSilver said:
I suppose...that's one way of looking at it. So they step into say.. Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Lebanon.. we just start lobbing missals into those countries?
Click to expand...

I would include ALL of the Middle East "Muslim" nations...in a "Who Gives a Hoot" realm. If ISIS wants to spread its lunacy into the nations you mentioned, it becomes the responsibility of those nations to take action....and Not us. If the Sunni and Shiite factions want to go after each other, so be it....the more they go after each other, the less effort they can devote to spreading their idiocy to our shores. Our concern should be more in keeping these radicals out of the U.S. Towards that goal, I would put more of our ground forces along our borders to assist the Border Patrol in intercepting any of these whacko's who might try to slip in among the illegals coming in from Mexico...which might also have a positive side effect in reducing the flow of illegal drugs from the Mexican Cartels. I would also do some serious work with the TSA and get some agents who can do their jobs properly...rather than standing around fondling themselves and harassing Grandmothers.
 
Ahhh... but the Corporate Military Industrial Complex might disagree with your plans. They profit BIG from continuous warfare.. They are the lobbyists and doners to the super pacs getting war hawks elected.. Again.. Thanks Citizens United.
 
That's right....Eisenhower warned about this Complex...but No one in Washington seems willing to listen. If a person follows the money on sites like OpenSecrets.org, it quickly becomes apparent that our MIC donates lavishly to Both sides of the Aisle...so no matter who wins the elections, the MIC interests are Well Protected. I would be surprised if many of these "Hawks" in Congress ever saw, first hand, the horrors of war. The one that amazes me most is McCain...one would think that after what he went through in VietNam, he would be dead set against exposing anyone else to such a mess...which makes me think that his time in VietNam affected his mind.
 
We are going to have to get our head around the change that has occurred in the world with the rise of ISIS. This is not just a regional power that would stop with an ME empire but, rather, has the world in its sights. Sooner or later the West will have to act with more force, and the sooner the better, as it will take more lives and treasure with the longer we wait...
 
Over reach is what brings them all down in the end.
Napoleon with Russia, Hitler opening the eastern front, the Soviets trying to beat the US in the arms race.
 
No. perhaps we should accelerate it.
The Russians did it to Napoleon by retreating from Moscow and burning the crops, leaving a scorched earth.

Perhaps they could be lured into a trap? A very big trap.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top