For the most part yes, we have left behind small peacekeeping forces. It is absurd/sickening that we have even let the ISIS get this far, if we really wanted too we could have stopped them by now.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Isis offensive near al-Bagdahdi, Western Iraq near US base with 300 marines stationed
- Thread starter Herpes Reasons
- Start date
- Status
speculawyer
Member
Ah. The concept of tripwire forces is back.
Dear god, I hope that's not what we're doing there, because that's the dumbest shit ever.
Dai Kaiju
Member
Well, we did. Then ISIS happened. So we kinda went back. It appears not many people have noticed...
Some of you guys haven't been paying complete attention or are only partially informed. Three months ago:
Obama sends 1,500 troops to Iraq - CNN. com
Yes, the vast majority of our forces have pulled out, but anyone who believes those 2900 troops are there in a non-combat role for the sole purpose of training and advising the Iraqi security force is kidding themselves. I mean, fuck, the whole reason Iraq fell to ISIS was because the Iraqi security forces we had previously trained fucking RAN AWAY instead of fighting back. It's also possible that many more troops have been sent since. The Pentagon doesn't issue a statement or hold a press briefing every single time they make a move. When they do, they do it knowing that ISIS is watching.
No, I'm aware he sent additional troops, but they do not have a combat role of any sorts. I mean its all good and stuff that we are helping to supply/train the Iraqis as well as having a limited air campaign against ISIS. What I'm saying is we could have fully committed by now and this mess prolly would have been close to being over. I don't like the idea of having the US filling the role of world police, but our inaction has dragged this thing out where we could have likely saved many lives and historical landmarks doing otherwise.
We could have stopped them FOR NOW.
As soon as we pull out again the same thing happens. It's a vicious cycle.
I'm pretty sure 300 marines would light those dipshit up without a second thought if they tried to take their base from them. They wouldn't just raise the white flag and give up.
Admittedly that would most liekly be the case at some point down the road, but at the very least military action would be better then letter the Islamic State continue to carve out more territory. Though ISIS is just part of the larger problem of Islamic extremism, I don't mean to offend by saying that, but you cannot deny that in the recent decade that any other religion has had that problem to the extent of Islam. With that said, the rest of the world needs to figure out a way to address said issue in a constructive way.
I'm conflicted here because if they actually do attack the base and many Americans are killed, it'll escalate the conflict and tons more ground troops will be sent in (which is just a matter of time). While I hate to see Americans sent there for years to come, it'll be over a lot quicker if we finish them off quicker than the Kurds can.
Kenshin001
Member
Eight suicide bombers got onto the base but were killed by ISF. Imagine if one of them had taken out US troops.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked