- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: What are your thoughts? Obama sending 300 "advisors" to Iraq
Posted on 6/20/14 at 8:48 am to BayouBlitz
Posted on 6/20/14 at 8:48 am to BayouBlitz
quote:
They can better assess the situation
Yep, assess the capability of both sides and keep an eye on the Iranians.
In the process of "advising" these guys will get real time, on the ground intel.
2
Posted on 6/20/14 at 8:51 am to Lakeboy7
quote:
In the process of "advising" these guys will get real time, on the ground intel.
This is probably a solid motivation, as we just don't do quality, strategic level HUMINT anymore - it's sad, because we were never all that great at it - particularly compared to the Brits, Russians or Israelis, but we were competent. Our surrender of that capability in the 70s (and it was largely self-inflicted - the CIA had just spend about 20 years "off the reservation", so to speak, and had to be reined in) directly led to many of our problems in the 90s, 9/11 and our continued failure to understand the situation in SW Asia.
Posted on 6/20/14 at 8:53 am to Lakeboy7
quote:
In the process of "advising" these guys will get real time, on the ground intel.
And do what with it?
Posted on 6/20/14 at 8:57 am to Ace Midnight
quote:
Ace Midnight
Hey you wouldn't be an old intel hand would ya?
And I agree, we do so many things well but HUMINT is not one of them.
Posted on 6/20/14 at 8:58 am to a want
As I was formulating my thoughts, it dawned on me, this has a very eerie similarity to 1960-1963.
Advisors. Assisting a failing government against a committed enemy.
Advisors. Assisting a failing government against a committed enemy.
Posted on 6/20/14 at 8:59 am to teke184
quote:
Sending in "advisers" during a full-blown rout like the Iraqi army is undergoing is a mistake.
It is the kind of halfassed move that JFK and LBJ made in Vietnam to fight the war on the cheap instead of getting the job done.
This.
Go in and do it right or just stay the frick out of it altogether.
Posted on 6/20/14 at 9:01 am to Lakeboy7
quote:
Hey you wouldn't be an old intel hand would ya?
And I agree, we do so many things well but HUMINT is not one of them.
I might have been in that business a lifetime ago.
Posted on 6/20/14 at 9:02 am to Wolfhound45
quote:
Assisting a failing government against a committed enemy.
Mission creep, happens to us a lot.
Posted on 6/20/14 at 9:18 am to a want
If the "advisors" he plans to send come out of the White House staff, then I'm 100% behind the idea. In fact I recommend Valerie Jarrett to lead the mission.
Posted on 6/20/14 at 9:32 am to a want
quote:
Partisan hats off.
You are one of the few on very rare occasions to actually abide by that statement.
Frankly, we shouldn't be continually giving our time, money and resources to these shithole countries that do zero for us - Pakistan, Mexico (for the most part), Iraq being the primary.
The economic ties between countries like Mexico and US are obviously strong, but just like with China, you paint yourself into a corner to get cheap labor and cheap production. So what happens when the "rouge" country doesn't want to play ball and comply? It's not like these multitude of companies can just pick up and leave overnight. It's a slippery slope IMO.
Posted on 6/20/14 at 9:32 am to Poodlebrain
quote:
If the "advisors" he plans to send come out of the White House staff, then I'm 100% behind the idea. In fact I recommend Valerie Jarrett to lead the mission.
Now we're getting somewhere. A few weeks training and they should be good to go.
The survivors would return with a clue on what's happening over there.
Posted on 6/20/14 at 9:37 am to Kcrad
I want to commend you for your avatar. Machine Head is my favorite album. I must have worn out at least 6 copies on vinyl over the years.
Posted on 6/20/14 at 9:38 am to a want
Isn't the definition of insanity doing the same thing over and over but expecting a different result?
Posted on 6/20/14 at 9:43 am to a want
If you are familiar with the Vietnam model, anticipate these "300 advisors" coming from two (or more) SF battalions and formed into a SOTF (or JSOTF - depends upon the composition of the force). They will be advising down to the battalion and probably company level. This will put them in harms way. Period. Also, they will need logistical support of some kind in country. Probably too far to draw from the resources we have in Kuwait. Anticipate we will "negotiate" for a bigger footprint than 300 (though that will be our "cap" number in the media).
Just saying. Not that simple to put 300 "advisors" into a combat zone.
Just saying. Not that simple to put 300 "advisors" into a combat zone.
Posted on 6/20/14 at 9:45 am to Wolfhound45
The real question should be
Are these guys advising the Iraqi army or the Sunni militias that are fighting ISIS?
Are these guys advising the Iraqi army or the Sunni militias that are fighting ISIS?
This post was edited on 6/20/14 at 9:48 am
Posted on 6/20/14 at 9:46 am to a want
quote:
What are your thoughts? Obama sending 300 "advisors" to Iraq
Obama really should stay out of it. His incompetence is going to get even more people killed.
Posted on 6/20/14 at 9:49 am to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
Are these guys advising the Iraqi army or the Sunni militias that are fighting ISIS?
Good question. I am going to work off the premise that they will be advising the Iraqi Army.
Posted on 6/20/14 at 9:51 am to Wolfhound45
Huge difference from Vietnam. We hadn't been in Vietnam for ten years, spent hundreds of billions of dollars already and lost thousands of lives at that point. That was done in the early sixties before the war ramped up in the mid-60's. We are done in Iraq. This will be a rescue operation for remaining westerners. 300 guys aren't going to hold off thousands of heavily armed terrorists indefinitely and the American people aren't going to tolerate sending thousands of American troops back into a winless situation again.
Posted on 6/20/14 at 9:56 am to genuineLSUtiger
quote:
We are done in Iraq. This will be a rescue operation for remaining westerners. 300 guys aren't going to hold off thousands of heavily armed terrorists indefinitely and the American people aren't going to tolerate sending thousands of American troops back into a winless situation again.
This assumes competence in deciding what operations we're doing over there.
With this dithering, vacilating frick we've got in the White House not sure about what he wants to do and sending mixed signals as the situation on the ground deteriorates, I'm not giving him the benefit of the doubt on what these guys are here for.
And frankly, given Benghazi, I'm not confident that this guy would be sending people to evacuate our consulates or embassies in Iraq if it looked like ISIS were at the door about to chop off our guys' heads and play soccer with them.
Posted on 6/20/14 at 9:58 am to a want
My thoughts are that idealism one way or the other be damned. This IS and always WILL BE our baby no matter which president is at fault. Our fingerprints are all over this, and that's why we can't leave it to go to shite or it will have much larger and longer consequences for this country. I think the advisors are a precursor for deployment.
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News