Posted on 11/03/2013 1:18:40 PM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
Are things so bad in Iraq that the government in Baghdad would like U.S. troops to return?
Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki appealed to President Obama for the U.S. military’s assistance on Friday, after his country suffered its most violent month in over five years.
Just under 1,000 people — overwhelmingly civilians — were killed in sectarian violence across Iraq in the last 31 days, making October the deadliest month since the height of the Iraq War in April 2008. The majority died via that hallmark of the Iraqi insurgency, the car bomb.
It’s the high-water mark for a rising tide of bloodshed since the complete withdrawal of American troops in December 2011. This year has proven particularly vicious, with the United Nations estimating well over 7,000 Iraqis killed in violent attacks since the start of 2013.
That number was undoubtedly on both Obama and Maliki’s minds as they met at the White House. Maliki had refused the president’s half-hearted attempt to renew American troop authorizations in 2011, but on Friday the prime minister begged Obama to send Apache attack helicopters and other military assets before his country descends back into civil war.
“We have a request — I won’t say a right — it’s a request,” Maliki said Thursday in a speech at the U.S. Institute of Peace in Washington. “Its not only about Iraq, but it’s about all the countries in the world that are suffering from terrorism.”
In a statement Friday evening, President Obama pushed Maliki for a more “inclusive” democracy and urged him to hold elections next year. He made no mention of providing military assistance.
White House press secretary Jay Carney said he did not “anticipate troops on the ground.”
They deserved Saddam.
I think the bottom line here is that the Iraqi Shiites will have to let the Iraqi Sunnis know that either they immediately kill every Sunni who attacks Shiites, or all the Sunnis in Iraq will soon live in another country.
It’s not nice, but judging from the place, this seems to be the only two alternatives. Truthfully, the easier of the two would be the religious cleansing. If they leave voluntarily, they go to Jordan. If they resist, they leave by the vast and empty Saudi Arabian desert.
Iraq once had a leader who was very effective at quelling sectarian violence. His name was Saddam Hussein.
It was the U.S. that toppled his government, remember?
I'm sorry, but my Give A Sh!t doesn't work anymore.
So what!
If we go in, overthrow their dictator, help them set up a repersentational govt and get it fairly peaceful...THEY OWE US military bases and access to oil.
In WW II with our Marshall Plan we got bases we needed for awhile and those bases kept the ruskies at bay. the problem now is we enter “wars” and expect nothing in return.
The way to end this War on Terror is to take over Saudi arabia overnight; set up our bases, take the oil , sell it to the russians and chinese at low prices and take the money to build up our country and military. If we are at risk by these Mooslims, then do what we did with the Japanese and the Nazis.
Let all the women and children move to the holy cities where they will be safe.
Hey, Iraqis...Its your country so fight to defend it.
"We have a request -- I won't say a right -- it's a request," Maliki said Thursday in a speech at the U.S. Institute of Peace in Washington. "It's not only about Iraq, but it’s about all the countries in the world that are suffering from terrorism."Burn in Hell Maliki, you Islamofascist POS.
Let the Chinese have it. They have more men to spare.
Begging for US military in Baghdad?
Spit *
We had momentum after 9/11, no doubt. But we lost it. Now what? Best we can do is to retreat from that part of the World and take out terrorists by drones.
Tell me what you really think.
Yeah, I shouldn’t bottle things up.
“Its not only about Iraq, but it’s about all the countries in the world that are suffering from terrorism.”
Should read:
“Its not only about Iraq, but it’s about all the countries in the world that are suffering from islam.”
Well, our troops did a great job getting in, despite the last minute refusal of Turkey to let the northern wing of the attack come through their country.
And there doesn’t seem to be much question that Saddam was getting too big for his britches, and bent on conquering the whole Middle East, one way or another.
And Saddam did meet with the chief of the 9/11 terrorists, although the press went out of their way to deny it.
But it seemed obvious to me at the time that Saudi Arabia was the chief force behind the terrorists. I thought Bush was doing in to secure the Iraqi oil before he took on the Saudis.
But, no. As you say, he didn’t really seem interested in doing what needed to be done.
So, what was the point?
At the time
If you’d like to be on or off, please FR mail me.
..................
Not happening. Just another crisis evolving for the President to "capitalize" on
It’s all Bush’s fault. Pay no attention to that civil war on the other side of the border. The great One has spoken.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.