Do you think we're going back into Iraq?

[philw]

what say you all

I say yep we will be back    teach them for pulling out too soon.   

[Solus]

what say you all

I say yep we will be back    teach them for pulling out too soon.

Not likely. 

It would screw up BHO's plans for a Muslim World

He could be supplying them with arms....and that is suspected as the reason for the Benghazi Massacre...to cover up arms deals with Muslim Brotherhood...our Ambassador knew to much.

[les snyder]

if there is a significant loss of control of the oil production or oil transportation areas

[tombogan03884]

Nope.
If the oil supply gets messed up BO will use it to push his failed "Green" agenda and further wreck US business. Even though the US gets little if any of it's oil from the region.
If he does intervene in any way it will be to strengthen the anti Western murderous Islamists supported by Iran.
Besides that, from the point of view of our real national interests, who gives a crap what they do to each other ?
It isn't as if they haven't been killing each other for the last 1000 years.

[alfack]

They don't want it bad enough, if a few militants can have their way with the powers that be.

Let them stew in their own lack of competence! We don't need to be wasting billions on them for nothing!

They are probably in collusion with the militants, trying to extort $ from us.

[Sponsor]

[Tyler Durden]

Why did we go to Iraq in the first place?

[kmitch200]

Why did we go to Iraq in the first place?

Well there was that whole WMD thing....and Bush II said he wanted Saddam because:
"He tried to kill my daddy."

So Saddam is at the end of a rope, no WMDs found, should have said "Later Dudes!" right then and told whoever rose to power that they needed to play nice with the neighbor kids or we'd be back and kick their azzes again.
Instead we tried "nation building" and the .gov screwed that up just like "nation building" HERE. What a freaking waste of lives, blood, time & money.

[Solus]

Well there was that whole WMD thing....and Bush II said he wanted Saddam because:
"He tried to kill my daddy."

So Saddam is at the end of a rope, no WMDs found, should have said "Later Dudes!" right then and told whoever rose to power that they needed to play nice with the neighbor kids or we'd be back and kick their azzes again.
Instead we tried "nation building" and the .gov screwed that up just like "nation building" HERE. What a freaking waste of lives, blood, time & money.

Don't know if anyone cares about it any more, but I believe the Geneva Convention requires the conquering nation to provide stability and protection for the conquered nation until they can reestablish a functioning government and military defense.

If there is a next time, we should be considering a kinetic option to neutralize the threat.

No reason to take any gear associated with us either 

[tombogan03884]

If you plan on building an effective military force for a country you need to figure on 20 years at least.
You can train up buck Sargent's and Captians in 4 or 5 years, but to make it stick you have to have trained, experienced Generals .
It takes a full generation for the trainees to work their way up to where the whole force is working from the same play book.

And before any one starts spouting that liberal crap about "No WMDS" remember this.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxLw3YC5MTU

[philw]

sounds like they are gearing up for a fight from the reports i saw today