Originally Posted by MontyB

But surely the idea that the insurgency had recognised that from 2010 onwards that the US withdrawal was almost complete so further sacrifice was futile as such the "hurting insurgents" were in fact just the dead enders who were determined to kill as many as they could before being killed is not unrealistic.

After all the Syrian revolution broke out around that time so perhaps the insurgents simply shifted their focus to an easier target while they waited for you to leave Iraq.

That's not what the intelligence I read suggested...now I know that there is certainly room for error...but when jaysh al Mahdi, al queda in Iraq, and JRTN are working together because they don't have the resources or capability to do it on their own...it shows that most of the VEN groups were hurting across the board. If you know anything about those groups specifically, you'd know they could not work together ideologically unless they had no other choice.

The Syrian revolution argument might hold some water, except that the movement didn't radicalize until well after the US withdrawal from Iraq. I actually think many of the groups that were hurting in Iraq were able to rejuvenate in the chaos and target rich environment that the Syrian revolution provided. Notice, the chaos in Iraq didn't start to pick up until there was Sunni rebel successes in on a large scale in Syria. Although not definitive...certainly worth noting.

Also, the armed forces agreement that was made in 2009 was supposed to be extended past the 2012 deadline. The Maliki government sat on it until October 2011 after a huge portion of coalition forces had already pulled out. Had it been renewed by July, which was when Obama told him to make sure he did it by, the 50,000 soldiers who were still in the country would have remained indefinitely. My orders going there even put me in Iraq until May of 2012 in anticipation of the extension of that agreement. It didn't happen. So if we weren't even sure, the ISF certainly wasn't and the insurgents most definitely didn't know. How could they kick back and wait for the unknown?

Originally Posted by brinktk

Also, the armed forces agreement that was made in 2009 was supposed to be extended past the 2012 deadline. The Maliki government sat on it until October 2011 after a huge portion of coalition forces had already pulled out. Had it been renewed by July, which was when Obama told him to make sure he did it by, the 50,000 soldiers who were still in the country would have remained indefinitely. My orders going there even put me in Iraq until May of 2012 in anticipation of the extension of that agreement. It didn't happen. So if we weren't even sure, the ISF certainly wasn't and the insurgents most definitely didn't know. How could they kick back and wait for the unknown?

Ok first off I am not really looking to argue over this as all I have to go by is the local media but...
It wasn't really an unknown as they knew you were leaving shortly all they didn't know was exactly when you were leaving.

Now I am only looking at it from the view of how I would have handled it had I inherited the situation (which may be totally wrong) and if it were me I would have wound down operations and focused on rebuilding, training and reequipping so that as soon as you were out the door I would be in a position to take advantage if the situation.

Rebuilding can't have been that easy as none of these groups have huge support but Syria fell over which would have provided the training and reequipping opportunities as well as some recruitment.

Clearly once they had an experienced core of fighters they hopped back over the border and watched what must be one of the worst army's in history disintegrate.

The Coalition - US keep the insurgents at bay, maintaining order in this cauldron of chaos. When the US left the Iraqi army could not fill these shoes. 1st and foremost their leadership is in a shambles. Had they keep more of the original officers in leadership roles perhaps they would have been capable of doing the job. But they were replaced with untried officers which lead to a complete breakdown. In other words they became headless - weak at the top. This was done by the present Shite government who installed their own cronies "nitwits" in command positions. The basically fired the military and government officials that had a degree of knowledge on how to run the place. This is a main reason for the quick disintegration.The ISIS is an opportunist organization many coming in from abroad. They look for a vacuum. Back to the experts.
I hope Brinktk is right about this ISIS eventually splitting - fading away a bit. I've read that that their fellow Sunni's are growing weary of them. Right now they are the greatest violator of basic human rights of any of the terrorist organizations in existance. The headlines "which can be prone to exaggeration" have them sighting in on Bagdad.

Time will tell I suppose.

The bottom line is that I didn't leave with my tail between my legs. The US military did not lose that war. We did absolutely everything that was asked of us and more on a daily basis for almost a decade without reverting to simply killing everyone. We showed incredible amounts of restraint in 99% of the cases where there was a threat and we had our hands tied the entire time.

Should we have been there in the first place? I don't know the answer to that and it isn't for me to decide. I was given an extremely difficult mission and was able to effect the areas I was responsible for in a positive way just like the hundreds of thousands of other service men and women who went. I'm not ashamed of my service there and have a lot more positive memories and relationships that came of it than bad ones.

Originally Posted by brinktk

Time will tell I suppose.

The bottom line is that I didn't leave with my tail between my legs. The US military did not lose that war. We did absolutely everything that was asked of us and more on a daily basis for almost a decade without reverting to simply killing everyone. We showed incredible amounts of restraint in 99% of the cases where there was a threat and we had our hands tied the entire time.

Should we have been there in the first place? I don't know the answer to that and it isn't for me to decide. I was given an extremely difficult mission and was able to effect the areas I was responsible for in a positive way just like the hundreds of thousands of other service men and women who went. I'm not ashamed of my service there and have a lot more positive memories and relationships that came of it than bad ones.

Of course the history book are loaded with accolades to our great victories over Nazi Germany and the Empire of Japan. One difference the menace presented by these people had to be stopped for the sake of mankind. However in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan the US military has defeated the enemy in every major engagement and despite the BS publicity that sometimes occurs every veteran that has participated in these campaigns should be proud of these victories and the fact that for the most part we didn't stoop down to level of those we opposed. My brother fought in Desert storm and was called up with only 2 weeks notice and was told he would be going to Arabia. He told me the Iraq's were happy to see the Americans "at least at 1st". He said the insurgents and terrorists fight a very dirty war not caring how many innocents are killed "even if it's their own". The US military itself has never left any conflict with it's tail wiggling, at least since WW2.

Originally Posted by brinktk

Time will tell I suppose.

The bottom line is that I didn't leave with my tail between my legs. The US military did not lose that war. We did absolutely everything that was asked of us and more on a daily basis for almost a decade without reverting to simply killing everyone. We showed incredible amounts of restraint in 99% of the cases where there was a threat and we had our hands tied the entire time.

Should we have been there in the first place? I don't know the answer to that and it isn't for me to decide. I was given an extremely difficult mission and was able to effect the areas I was responsible for in a positive way just like the hundreds of thousands of other service men and women who went. I'm not ashamed of my service there and have a lot more positive memories and relationships that came of it than bad ones.

We may not all pray here, but I thank God that in Nations all around the coalition there are men and women like you that regardless of all odds actually stand up for us all.

I am ashamed of past decisions some of our leaders have made these past 50 years. Not only of morality but where it has lead many aspects of our society today away from the interest of our unborn generations.

But the victories, the triumphs and the sacrifices those who served have taken will always be sacred to me.

I will always have my heart with those who serve, and my true respect and passion goes out to all those serving in the coalition, especially my fellow countrymen and women here at home.

Regardless how I feel about why our leaders sent us there. Or what debacles they may initiate. My heart will always rest with you. I will always strive to do what small amounts I can to make this a better place to live for us all, regardless of who or what is in office.

Respectfully

-Yo.

ISIS fighters seized control of three towns in northern Iraq on Sunday after fierce battles with Kurdish security forces, sending thousands of people fleeing to the nearby mountains and threatening the country’s largest dam.
Hours later, as the militants demanded that the city’s residents swear allegiance to ISIS or be killed, the group’s social media campaign was underway, with photos posted online showing militants patrolling the city.
The United Nations representative in Baghdad, Nickolay Mladenov, issued a statement on Sunday, citing reports he had that as many as 200,000 civilians, mostly from the minority Yazidi community, had fled the fighting
After taking Mosul, the group gave Christians three options: convert, pay a hefty tax or be killed.

Kurds want independence, so it is good time for them to prove themselves.

Originally Posted by hamidreza

Kurds want independence, so it is good time for them to prove themselves.

This is a ridicules statement. It is like saying every sovereign nation should have too prove itself militarily in order to exist. The Kurds were gassed and murdered by Saddam by the 10 of thousands. They are still being squelched by Turkey and Iran and now you say that these murderous thugs have the rite to do so as well?
.

Originally Posted by JOC

This is a ridicules statement. It is like saying every sovereign nation should have too prove itself militarily in order to exist. The Kurds were gassed and murdered by Saddam by the 10 of thousands. They are still being squelched by Turkey and Iran and now you say that these murderous thugs have the rite to do so as well?
.

Have you forgotten what Barezani said when ISIS fighters were conquering Iraq cities? He said we Kurds didn't feel safety and security in Iraq. Maliki couldn't control Iraq so we should have our country to could protect ourselves against terrorist. And we saw how they protect themselves! Before any help Barezani should announce that his claim for independence was a mistake.