Photo of destroyed Iraqui M1A1M

[AttorneyAtWar]

This is where I am conflicted, on one hand I think its great that we pulled our forces out of Iraq, but I understand the argument and agree that it also caused militants to pretty much ruin it again. However, directly blaming Obama for it is pretty silly considering we all know who got us into the war in the first place and how. I think the question becomes how long do you want us to stay there even while the countries government was asking us to leave a few years ago. Having a garrison in Iraq isn't like having one in Korea, servicemen are still going to be killed and if the Iraqi's aren't going to fight for themselves after all the equipment, training and money they received from us the entire time we were there, why should we stay?

 

Edit: I say conflicted but I lean way more to leaving completely, I figured I should say that.

Edited May 20, 2015 by Raptorx7

[Razgovory]

There is a reason why countries like Iraq adopted Soviet doctrines.  It might not build the most efficient army, but if you want to armed a large group of poorly educated and disinterested people of wildly differing backgrounds and get them all to marching in the same direction, the soviets had a talent for it.  I'm not sure if Western soldiers would be conformable training them that way, or meting out Soviet style discipline.

[db_zero]

I can't speak for what took place in Iraq, but it sounds like things haven't changed since I lived in the region.

 

Just because they were trained and equiped by Americans doesn't mean squat..as the saying goes you can lead a horse to water, but you can't force it to drink.

 

What a waste of a trillion or so of American taxpayer dollars. Its so bad banks and even money exchangers won't take Iraqi Dinars.

 

I don't blame Obama for causing this mess as he inherited it, but he made a bad situation worse and he is completely clueless. When our longtime allieds in the region tell him where to stick it when he invites them over for a conference regarding the region that speaks volumes. They don't trust him or believe he knows what he is doing. They are counting the days till he leaves office and hoping the next CiC has a clue.

 

We will more than likely see a nuclear arms race in the region and if that happens it will clearly be on Obamas neck.

[AttorneyAtWar]

I can't speak for what took place in Iraq, but it sounds like things haven't changed since I lived in the region.

 

Just because they were trained and equiped by Americans doesn't mean squat..as the saying goes you can lead a horse to water, but you can't force it to drink.

 

What a waste of a trillion or so of American taxpayer dollars. Its so bad banks and even money exchangers won't take Iraqi Dinars.

 

I don't blame Obama for causing this mess as he inherited it, but he made a bad situation worse and he is completely clueless. When our longtime allieds in the region tell him where to stick it when he invites them over for a conference regarding the region that speaks volumes. They don't trust him or believe he knows what he is doing. They are counting the days till he leaves office and hoping the next CiC has a clue.

 

We will more than likely see a nuclear arms race in the region and if that happens it will clearly be on Obamas neck.

 

What a riveting analysis, Fox News had a good segment on this I am guessing?

[db_zero]

What a riveting analysis, Fox News had a good segment on this I am guessing?

 

I don't have anything personally against Obama, but there comes a time when you have to take responsibility. That man still continues to fix blame on the previous administration for all his problems as well as his die hard supporters. I like many gave him the benefit of the doubt, but there comes a time when you have to man up and take responsibility.

 

Even many Democrats are openly questioning Obamas policies and competence. Many war correspondents who were highly critical of Bush are now very critical of Obamas handling of the Middle East and the Saudis have openly stated that they will pursue nuclear weapons if Obama continues to appease Iran. Many in Obamas party will do all they can to kill any deal he tries to make with Iran.

 

This isn't a Foxnews or liberal vs conservative wedge issue. This is a united front against Obama's handling of the Middle East.

 

I know that whatever I say won't convince you otherwise. I've dealt with many like you. I lived in one of the most liberal regions in the country. An area where you couldn't name the last conservative elected to any position from the lowest member of city government to the mayor and beyond. Yet, it was always the fault of the conservatives for everything. When you asked why things were the same way after decades of the same old tax and spend polices and the culture of dependence on government assistance it was always the conservtives fault for everything.

Edited May 21, 2015 by db_zero

[Apocal]

This isn't a Foxnews or liberal vs conservative wedge issue. This is a united front against Obama's handling of the Middle East.

 

I can only speak for myself, but I enjoy not having to attempt to fix Iraq's problems while dodging roadside bombs and needing a gatling gun to avoid getting a rocket with my dinner.

[MikeyD]

We're not entirely sure the turret in the foreground and hull in the background are from the same vehicle. For all we know the photographer was standing on the hull that belonged with the turret to take the picture.

 

About the damaged/destroyed Abrams, I believe before the year 2000 Abrams during its service life had experienced on the order of 600 vehicle fires. We're talking peacetime US deployment, impeccably maintained. The cited causes read like a laundry list of vehicle components. More that a few were complete burn-outs, total losses. If you recall the published Iraq invasion photos they included shots of Abrams on fire. The same tank in rugged service in Iraq with amateur hour maintenance? Its hard to tell if you're looking at photos of combat kills, immobilization/destruction to keep it out of enemy hands, or simple spontaneous combustion.

[db_zero]

I can only speak for myself, but I enjoy not having to attempt to fix Iraq's problems while dodging roadside bombs and needing a gatling gun to avoid getting a rocket with my dinner.

Completely understandable. IMO should have never went there in the first place, but as the famous saying goes "you break it you own it". Doing a complete 180 and sticking your head in the sand and hoping for change hasn't worked out either.

There is now talk of re-introducing forces back into Iraq on a larger scale than we already have to take on ISIS. I seriously doubt the current administration will, but the next one be it Dem or Repub likely will do so if Iran continues to tinker and ISIS remains strong.

Perhaps after a few years of abuse at the hands of ISIS the Iraqi people may be more appreciative of American assistance, although the religious and secular differences will always remain and no matter what someone will always hate us.

It may just be time to partition Iraq.

No going back to the way it was before 2003. Don't think we can just ignore it and hope it just goes away.

[Thewood1]

Oh, yeah, the good old days for Iraq pre-2003.  Let's see, a war that killed millions, another war that cost it its army, etc.  Iraq is a mess, it was a mess under its pre-2003 regime, it will be a mess for a long time to come.  All the 2003 invasion did was accelerate the transition from one mess to another.

[agusto]

Iraq currently very much reminds me of post-WW1 Germany. The following is by no means and objective or complete analysis, just my subejctive impression. I think people in Iraq have never lived in a democratic country and are in general not used to take the responsibilities that living in a democratic society requires of each and every citizen. Saddam was what held Iraq togather by force, and after Saddam was, gone people were attracted by various extremist groups because they offered them a sense of power and security in a time where they felt powerless and threatened. This attraction to extremeist groups was further amplified by the dire economical situation after the 2003 invasion and by the lack of experience of living in a democracy. The result of all of the above is ISIS, which is pretty much the Iraqi version the 1940s Nazis. The biggest difference between ISIS and the Nazis is IMO that, unfortunately, the Nazis had the economic and military power to actually implement their extremeist views. ISIS totally would do 1939-1945 all-over again if they had the power to do so. Here is a pic ISIS released recently:

 

[db_zero]

ISIS may not have the economic power the Nazis had, but I have no doubt that if they can unleash a dirty bomb, chemical or biological attack in a major western urban center they will do so in a heartbeat.

[Nidan1]

As to the photo, anyone consider Photoshop? Looks too staged for me, no smoke or scoring marks anywhere on the turret. Hatches look intact. If a turret was blown off a tank by a catastrophic internal explosion wouldn't it have some externally visible damage.  

[akd]

Not photoshop.  It was destroyed by a powerful VBIED that rammed the left side of the tank and blew it off the road (which is where photographer in OP photo is standing).  Someone subsequently dragged the hull down the slope away from the turret for some reason.  Here is a pic soon after the initial attack taken from the below the road:

 

 

A US Abrams also lost its turret to a powerful buried IED in 2006.  Two crew members survived.

 

http://spacecoastdaily.com/2013/05/russ-marek-a-space-coast-hero/

Edited May 21, 2015 by akd

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

 

 

I can only speak for myself, but I enjoy not having to attempt to fix Iraq's problems while dodging roadside bombs and needing a gatling gun to avoid getting a rocket with my dinner.

 

I miss the ambiance of "test fire test fire test fire" followed by the BRAAAAAAPPPPPPP and then the popopopopopop that came with dinner sometimes.  I got to watch a for real rocket get shot down, which was cool though. 

 

But yeah.  Iraq has more issues than National Geographic.  The US intervention as I've said a few time simply shook free some that were going to fall anyway.

 

Which is why I hate the Micheal Moore rendition of peaceful Iraqi children kingdom until the big bad Americans came and destroyed everything.  I think what we're seeing now would have played out much the same, it's just we'd have seen Saddam or his kids boasting about how dead the ISIS dudes in Ramadi are going to be in a few weeks instead of the current administration (as Sunni as Saddam was, ISIS is way crazier, and the radical Islam-Saddam link never really existed).

 

Re: Obama vs Bush

 

They're both pretty marginal in their own ways.  I always felt Bush's getting us into Iraq was his greatest blunder (and a vast, huge one worth raking him over the coals for), but by the surge Bush was a lot smarter than most folks give him credit for, and put us on a glide path to exiting Iraq as gracefully as we could have.  

 

On the other hand I've always felt like watching Obama do foreign affairs is like watching armature hour, and would be improved with a slide whistle at the proper times.  It feels like the only times he's done something right has been when "doing nothing' was the correct answer, and rarely was it on purpose, it was simply not coming to a decision).  Also the use of hashtags in lieu of meaningful action will always boggle my mind.

 

 With that all out of the way, I was on the ground in Iraq 2008-2009, and then again 2010-2011.  The training mission stuff to the Iraqis...it could have gone on until 2030 and gotten not much better results.  There's a lot wrong culturally with the Iraqis (or if you're being all nice about it, a lot that isn't compatible with modern military efficiency), and as long as you're building the Iraqi military from Iraqis, it's going to be pretty marginal (unless Iraq's security situation gets to the point where you can form a small, very selective force, and also have an external body to shoot/fire the Iraqis that fail to perform).

[Razgovory]

Iraq currently very much reminds me of post-WW1 Germany. The following is by no means and objective or complete analysis, just my subejctive impression. I think people in Iraq have never lived in a democratic country and are in general not used to take the responsibilities that living in a democratic society requires of each and every citizen. Saddam was what held Iraq togather by force, and after Saddam was, gone people were attracted by various extremist groups because they offered them a sense of power and security in a time where they felt powerless and threatened. This attraction to extremeist groups was further amplified by the dire economical situation after the 2003 invasion and by the lack of experience of living in a democracy. The result of all of the above is ISIS, which is pretty much the Iraqi version the 1940s Nazis. The biggest difference between ISIS and the Nazis is IMO that, unfortunately, the Nazis had the economic and military power to actually implement their extremeist views. ISIS totally would do 1939-1945 all-over again if they had the power to do so. Here is a pic ISIS released recently:

 

 

 

They may as well post pictures of Middle Earth.

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

 

 

They may as well post pictures of Middle Earth.

 

ISIS has about as much to do with theologically correct Islam, or reality as middleearth, so it's a pretty fitting statement.  

[agusto]

Well they will of course never ever be able to conquer all the lands they marked as targets on that map, but they would if they could. I posted that pic to show  that ISIS' expansionist ideas are similar to Hitlers, only that Hitler had the power to actually conquer most of Europe and large parts of Russia.

[akd]

 

 

ISIS has decided Italy can keep Sicily.

[Pat O]

Simply Going off the picture it looks to me like this was removed. Notice the complete lack of flash burn on the paint especially the IRAQI flag. The thin steel storage racks on the side of the turret are not bent or mis-shaped. On The ground there is no evidence of something with the weight of a turret slamming into the ground. This is simply a staged photo in my opinion for propaganda purposes. We know what Iraqis do they pop smoke and flee. The equipment is left with rounds in the chamber and a nice note for ISIS a cup of hot chia. 

 

In Regards to the training of Iraqi personnel by U.S Soldiers. You have some good units but if we take a look at what the Iraqi Army has done both times we went up against them I am not surprised in the least bit by their "ditch our uniforms and run" when faced with a determined enemy. The majority of the Iraqi and Afghan army training I have witnessed showed a huge interest in marching and not really fighting. That was driven by the Iraqi or Afghan Leadership and not the U.S or contractor training teams. They can march alright and they marched their butts right back to their homes in many cases. That is not to say that all Iraqi or afghan units are like this but as many a veteran will tell you the corruption and pay for position commanders don't really run a tight ship and are usually the first to cut an run.

[Pat O]

Not photoshop.  It was destroyed by a powerful VBIED that rammed the left side of the tank and blew it off the road (which is where photographer in OP photo is standing).  Someone subsequently dragged the hull down the slope away from the turret for some reason.  Here is a pic soon after the initial attack taken from the below the road:

 

 

A US Abrams also lost its turret to a powerful buried IED in 2006.  Two crew members survived.

 

http://spacecoastdaily.com/2013/05/russ-marek-a-space-coast-hero/

 As you can see in this photo notice the flash burns on the paint and general surrounding debris.

Good post.

[Melchior]

In Regards to the training of Iraqi personnel by U.S Soldiers. You have some good units but if we take a look at what the Iraqi Army has done both times we went up against them I am not surprised in the least bit by their "ditch our uniforms and run" when faced with a determined enemy. The majority of the Iraqi and Afghan army training I have witnessed showed a huge interest in marching and not really fighting. That was driven by the Iraqi or Afghan Leadership and not the U.S or contractor training teams. They can march alright and they marched their butts right back to their homes in many cases. That is not to say that all Iraqi or afghan units are like this but as many a veteran will tell you the corruption and pay for position commanders don't really run a tight ship and are usually the first to cut an run.

Remember when everyone was saying how America learned from the Vietnam War and wouldn't make all those mistakes with the Iraqis it made with ARVN forces?

[Saferight]

Does the first clip in this video look like a kill on a Iraqi Abrams? 

 

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f88_1402790352

 

Also here just for reference here is a propaganda clip of a abandoned Abrams being blown up

 

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=9ae_1423994373

[Apocal]

Completely understandable. IMO should have never went there in the first place, but as the famous saying goes "you break it you own it".

 

The by-and-large media silence on Libya gives lie to this statement.

[Thewood1]

Libya was a good example of what we now call the Iraq-syndrome (formerly known as the Vietnam-syndrome)...get involved without getting involved.

[Melchior]

If you want to be real informed you could know it as "Boer War" syndrome. What we're seeing today are just the modern versions of c.19th century colonial wars.