The Meltdown In Iraq: It’s Bushes Fault! No Really!

In their article “Iraq’s implosion could redraw Middle East boundaries“, Reuters goes into a brief explanation of why the insurgents are proving so effective against the million man American trained Iraqi Army. Seems it’s because they are having few problems recruiting disaffected soldiers and officers from Saddam Hussein’s army.

“In fact, the most important development about ISIL in the last year is its ability to recruit former officers and soldiers of the dissolved Iraqi army. If you observe how ISIL has been waging war you see a skilled mini army, confident, that has command and control, is motivated and using war tactics.”

The ISIL advance has been joined by former Baathist officers who were loyal to Saddam as well as disaffected armed groups and tribes who want to topple Maliki. So far the towns and cities that have fallen to the militants have been Sunni.

The million-strong Iraqi army, by contrast, trained by the United States at a cost of more than $20bn, is hobbled by low morale and corruption that impedes its supply lines.

Its effectiveness is hurt by a perception among Sunnis that it pursues the hostile interests of the Shi’ites, a majority in Iraq, raised to power by the U.S. led invasion of 2003.

No thanks to former President George W Bush and his lackeys on the scene in Iraq who dissolved Hussein’s army and left totally out in the cold. A lot of pundits and strategists at the time suggested that this was a bad idea…and now they’ve been proven correct. But the GOP in Washington instead attack President Obama for being weak in Iraq…in a situation that he and we shouldn’t even be facing.

We need to remember who the real culprits are here…the vindictive members of Bush II’s administration.


Related Articles

5 thoughts on “The Meltdown In Iraq: It’s Bushes Fault! No Really!

  1. Thanks for the post Ed, excellent question from First Draft author Michael F:

    and the link from that diary about how much the Iraq war cost the US, $6Trillion (just parts the monetary costs, human tolls are also listed along with totals of humans killed that can only be guessed at):

    Having lived through Bush/Cheney(Haliburton) let us envision what a Walker/Koch LLP would bring us as POTUS. Thought I’d bring it full circle here to our state’s, “mission accomplished.”

    1. PS: I didn’t forget Obomba/Wall St LLP and Africom and Ukraine, $5B in loans to the puppets in Kyiv as an initial calling card. At home, a free press being jailed, and a tactical military attack vehicle in every county. Spying on you and me as if we are all immediately suspected terrorists. Stingray deployed by your local police as deemed needed, with no warrants. “Hello, I must be going.”

  2. The danger here is how close the MSM is getting to establishing a pro-war narrative already. The elites love war because it’s a money-maker. The baggers love war because they buy into the antiquated notion of American Exceptionalism. President Obama clearly does not want to be sucked in but the pro-war crowd is loud, righteous and on the way towards increasing their representation in 2014.

  3. Sorry, but very major disagreement with your first sentence. The danger, as it has always been with the MSM is that they have and continue to fail to report to the US audience, the truth about what the US/CIA is doing, foremost are Ukraine and Africa at the moment.

    Yes, it appears everybody is, “after,” Obomba on Iraq’s most immediate troubles, but there is nothing about war mongering that Barry is against nor has he ever been against or hesitant about. Destabilizing any country or continent, through military (and CIA) involvement (Syria very recently) to please Wall St and the banker/owner class is and has been job one without exception.

    ICYMI, if you have the time, take a glance at the links in this BB comment and the criticisms by Paul Craig Roberts and an informed analysis of US involvement in the Ukraine in the last link there.

Comments are closed.