Why the Iraqi army keeps failing

Shiite militias have surged into Iraq's Anbar province, a largely Sunni region, in a government-sanctioned bid to recapture the provincial capital Ramadi, which was seized in its entirety by the jihadists of the Islamic State at the end of last week. Thousands have fled the city, which is about 80 miles west of Baghdad.

Ramadi's fall poses a problem for U.S. officials, who have sought to paint a picture of a weakening Islamic State. One Pentagon spokesman told reporters that the city's capture was part of "complex, bloody fight" in which "there are going to be ebbs and flows."

The sudden advance of the extremist militants into the city's last government-held redoubts was enabled in part by a series of coordinated car bomb blasts. The panicked retreat that followed seemed a replay of the events of nearly a year ago, when Iraqi forces defending Mosul, the largest city in northern Iraq, melted away in the face of an Islamic State onslaught. The jihadist organization still controls Mosul and has carried out hideous attacks on religious minorities in its surrounding areas.

For all the efforts of a host of factions battling the jihadists on the ground, as well as an extensive campaign of U.S. airstrikes and commando operations, the Islamic State remains extraordinarily resilient. In comparison, the Iraqi army appears tragically feeble, unable to wage an effective counterinsurgency despite billions of American dollars spent in training and arms, and easily overwhelmed by the militants' rapid gains.

The original sin, many argue, was the disbanding of the Iraqi army following the U.S. invasion in 2003, which toppled the country's long-ruling dictator Saddam Hussein. As my colleague Liz Sly reported in a lengthy expose, military officers belonging to Hussein's Baath party — a nominally secular institution — eventually emerged as the key figures

The Iraqi army isn’t losing. ISIS is the Iraqi army. They are fighting conscripts, Shia and Kurds. Sound familiar?

Instead of Sarin they are beheading people. And with Assad in Iran’s sphere, they have no use for him like Saddam did. Holy war? This is a flat out Iraqi Republican Guard on the move. If it was religious, the Saudi’s would be standing with them. The Saudis are scared to death.

Caliphate? Yup, Iran vs Iraq just like 1978-80. And just like that time, we have a Democrat in the white hut who can’t spell cat if spotted the C and the T.

It’s hard to believe a military leader could make a whinier, more pathetic statement about a war in progress than “there are going to be ebbs and flows.’’

The U.S. has the mightiest military in the world. The purpose of its generals is to devise a winnable war plan, get it approved by the Commander-in-Chief, and then carry it out swiftly and successfully — which our generals have failed to do in Iraq.

Why? Every general in the world understands that it’s almost impossible to win wars from the air only, because it’s impossible for planes to consistently hit strategic targets without directions from soldiers on the ground.

So it’s likely that our generals presented a war plan including boots on the ground to Obama, which Obama rejected. At which point, every honorable general in the Pentagon would have handed in his/her resignation rather than be a party to sending our young men and women in to fight a war that they knew was unwinnable.

Which means that the only generals left are not honorable. They’re the ones sending Pentagon spokesmen out to make statements about ebbs and flows because they’re too embarrassed to make such pathetic statements themselves, and they’re also whining to Congressional committees about Ramadi not being strategically important.

This is why Iraq as a civilized country is doomed — not because the Iraqi army is weak, we’ve known that from the start, but because our president and his generals have knowingly refused to do what is necessary to help the Iraqis preserve their country.

You’re dealing with a culture that can pivot on a dime depending on a situation, which way the wind is blowing. If the wind were blowing against IS, they would go that way.

Reminds me of numerous British observations over the past several hundred years that...., "You can rent an Arab but you will never own them"... For that matter, it is always true that you can "Rent" loyalty but it can only be given freely, regardless of ethnicity!!!

The Iraqi army as supplied, trained and equipped under Bush dissolved after US forces left-- the Iraqi government replaced their commanders with corrupt Shiite officers who looted the army's coffers and provided little or no training to the army. Almost all of the original army trained by the US left and was replaced by Shiite neer-do-wells looking for a free meal.

Without US trainers embedded with the Iraqi units to provide constant training (and supervision of corrupt and incompetent officers), the current Iraqi army will never be worth a damn.

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.