Jump to content

Obama: US lacks 'complete strategy' for training Iraqis


Recommended Posts

Posted

Obama: US lacks 'complete strategy' for training Iraqis
By JULIE PACE and NEDRA PICKLER

ELMAU, Germany (AP) — Acknowledging military setbacks, President Barack Obama said Monday the United States still lacks a "complete strategy" for training Iraqi forces to fight the Islamic State. He urged Iraq's government to allow more of the nation's Sunnis to join the campaign against the violent militants.

Nearly one year after American troops started returning to Iraq to assist local forces, Obama said the Islamic State remains "nimble, aggressive and opportunistic." He touted "significant progress" in areas where the U.S. has trained Iraqis to fight but said forces without U.S. assistance are often ill-equipped and suffer from poor morale.

IS fighters captured the key Anbar provincial capital of Ramadi last month, prompting Defense Secretary Ash Carter to lament that Iraqi troops lacked "the will to fight." That was a strikingly negative assessment of a military that has been the beneficiary of billions in U.S. assistance dating back to the war started during the administration of U.S. President George. W. Bush in 2003.

Still, Obama indicated that simply increasing the number of Americans in Iraq would not resolve the country's issues. The U.S. currently has about 3,000 troops there for train-and-assist missions.

"We've got more training capacity than we have recruits," he said at the close of a two-day Group of Seven meeting at a luxury resort tucked in the Bavarian Alps.

G-7 leaders invited Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi to join them Monday for talks on the security situation in the Middle East. Obama and Abadi also met one-on-one shortly before the president departed for Washington.

In both public and private, Obama urged Abadi and his Shiite-led government to allow more Sunnis to fight the Islamic State. The White House has long blamed Iraq's sectarian divisions for stoking the kind of instability that allowed the militants to thrive.

"We've seen Sunni tribes who are not only willing and prepared to fight ISIL, but have been successful at rebuffing ISIL," Obama said by the U.S. government. "But it has not been happening as fast as it needs to."

In Washington, the highest-ranking Sunni in Iraq's government said Sunni tribes are still receiving insufficient training and inferior weapons compared to the national army. Parliament Speaker Salim al-Jabouri put the onus for fixing that on Baghdad, saying it should provide clear assurances that the tribes will receive the necessary weapons.

"Guarantees create confidence, and we need confidence," al-Jabouri told a small group of reporters, speaking through an interpreter.

An early opponent of Bush's war in Iraq, Obama withdrew U.S. forces in late 2011 and has vowed that he won't send Americans back into combat there. The U.S., along with coalition partners, is launching airstrikes in both Iraq and Syria, but is banking on local ground forces to supplement that effort.

A six-week U.S. combat training course instructs Iraqi forces in how to shoot, communicate and move about on the battlefield. They are also given individual military equipment.

Col. Steve Warren, Pentagon spokesman, told reporters Monday that the U.S. wants to be able to increase the number of Iraqi troops being trained, but to do that the Iraq government has to increase the number of troops it provides. As of June 4, the U.S. had trained 8,920 Iraqi troops at the four sites, and 2,601 more are undergoing training, Warren said.

Beyond Iraq's sectarian divisions, senior defense officials said, training is hindered because Iraqi security forces have difficulty getting to training sites. Not only are they consumed with fighting, but there are also risks in the travel itself, from Islamic State fighters to roadside bombs and blocked roads.

Some Republicans in the U.S. say the Islamic State's strength is a result of what they see as Obama's muddled and ineffective strategy. The president was sharply criticized in August for saying the U.S. didn't have an overall strategy for fighting the Islamic State, and his comments Monday about plans for training the Iraqis sounded similar.

"We aren't winning the fight against ISIL because we don't have a winning plan," Rep. Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., said. "The president can't delay anymore, especially as ISIL continues to make major gains."

The campaign against the Islamic State was one of several security issues on the agenda during the G-7 talks. Leaders also spent significant time discussing the crisis in Ukraine, where the West alleges Russia continues to sow instability.

In a joint statement, the leaders vowed to keep sanctions in place until a fragile peace agreement is fully implemented. They also said sanctions could increase if Russia escalates its aggression, despite the fact that the economic penalties have done little to change Vladimir Putin's approach so far.

Until last year, Russia had joined the U.S., Canada, Britain, Germany, France, Italy and Japan in the bloc of leading industrial nations. But those nations kicked Russia out last year as part of its punishments for actions in Ukraine.
___

Pace reported from Telfs, Austria. AP writers Bradley Klapper and Lolita C. Baldor in Washington contributed to this report.

aplogo.jpg
-- (c) Associated Press 2015-06-09

Posted

You can bring a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.

btw, the Brits just announced they're sending 120 'military trainers' to Iraq.

The region now known as Iraq has had armed conflicts for thousands of years. I say 'let 'em stew in their own juices.' Conflicts are going to continue to rage there, no matter what western countries do, or how many western soldiers are sent to the cauldron. Animals have traits. Humans are animals. If some groups of humans suffer constant conflicts, particularly among men between ages 15 and 50, well, that's tough, but they've got to deal with it. They could start by dumping their archaic and mean-spirited belief systems, but they'd sooner die in misery than do that.

Posted (edited)

You can bring a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.

btw, the Brits just announced they're sending 120 'military trainers' to Iraq.

The region now known as Iraq has had armed conflicts for thousands of years. I say 'let 'em stew in their own juices.' Conflicts are going to continue to rage there, no matter what western countries do, or how many western soldiers are sent to the cauldron. Animals have traits. Humans are animals. If some groups of humans suffer constant conflicts, particularly among men between ages 15 and 50, well, that's tough, but they've got to deal with it. They could start by dumping their archaic and mean-spirited belief systems, but they'd sooner die in misery than do that.

A little late for that .now isn't ?

How about if we let them "stew in their own juices"before we went in and destroyed their country?

Edited by sirineou
Posted

Obama said that, did he. Just over a year ago Obama called ISIS a "jayvee" (JV, junior varsity, amateur) team when talking to The New Yorker Magazine. LINK.

So much for forward planning for the guy with no military experience. facepalm.gif

Posted

ISIS is partially military, partially religious and partially culture. They cannot be blown up and they cannot be fought in a conventional manner. There is no strategy because there really can't be a strategy. Until the local people tire of this type of madness (or acquiesce), it will continue.

At this point, the less we do the better.

As for the Iraqi soldiers, you cannot train people to be brave.

Posted

Obama's press conference last night (Bangkok time) was embarrassing. The fumbling on Iraq, health care and everything else he addressed showed a man without a clue. And the stammering and stuttering, clipped sentences, verbal hiccups and such? He actually sounded more inarticulate than George W. Bush. Strategy for Iraq? It's lucky he has a strategy to be able to get back home safely.

Posted

You can bring a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.

btw, the Brits just announced they're sending 120 'military trainers' to Iraq.

The region now known as Iraq has had armed conflicts for thousands of years. I say 'let 'em stew in their own juices.' Conflicts are going to continue to rage there, no matter what western countries do, or how many western soldiers are sent to the cauldron. Animals have traits. Humans are animals. If some groups of humans suffer constant conflicts, particularly among men between ages 15 and 50, well, that's tough, but they've got to deal with it. They could start by dumping their archaic and mean-spirited belief systems, but they'd sooner die in misery than do that.

A little late for that .now isn't ?

How about if we let them "stew in their own juices"before we went in and destroyed their country?

I think the idea was that we would bring them into the 21st century and they would embrace democracy and develop into countries with societies like ours.

In hindsight, it didn't work. Their religion makes sure their society stays in the middle ages. There are no good options left now. I can't help thinking that sending more and more weapons is just making trouble for ourselves in the future - but politicians don't care about then next 20 years : only the next election.

When we don't need oil any more, all of these problems will disappear. They will go back to farming goats and we will go back to ignoring them.

Posted

Obama said that, did he. Just over a year ago Obama called ISIS a "jayvee" (JV, junior varsity, amateur) team when talking to The New Yorker Magazine. LINK.

So much for forward planning for the guy with no military experience. facepalm.gif

Iraq needs some serious community organizing. Maybe Obama's gotten a little rusty in that department. Or maybe he never was any good at it. Being an alleged constitutional lecturer, maybe he should try his hand at writing Iraq a new one ... or something else that is non-violent.

Does Baghdad have any decent golf courses?

Posted (edited)

Iraq has no will to be together, they'd rather be ISIStan or Kurdistan or Sunnistan or Shiitytan.

So why should we Americans invest time, money, sweat, blood and lives in a meaningless country?

Oh just because we have nostalgia of Bush conquering Iraq? F that..

The we have no strategy is a brilliant strategy, let the iraqi's worry about themselves. If it's on their priority list, they'll handle it. It's their home after all.

Edited by JakeSully
Posted

The strategy is spot on. Make it as easy as possible for them to kill each other and then just sit back and watch.

No more unnecessary coalition soldier fatalities.

thumbsup.gif

Posted

The USA put 50,000 military advisors into South Vietnam.

But again with no winning strategy. Same for Iraq/Syria. The winning strategy must come from Iraq and its Middel Eastern allies. And for that to happen the Iraqi army must be inclusive of all Iraqi people.

Posted

And this is the way President Obama treats an ally.

One that takes our money and gives us nothing..

You still remember how they used to call Pakistan our KEY ALLY in the war in terror. Totally incompetent and/or false ally. With ally's like those, who needs enemies?

Posted

Obama said that, did he. Just over a year ago Obama called ISIS a "jayvee" (JV, junior varsity, amateur) team when talking to The New Yorker Magazine. LINK.

So much for forward planning for the guy with no military experience. facepalm.gif

Iraq needs some serious community organizing. Maybe Obama's gotten a little rusty in that department. Or maybe he never was any good at it. Being an alleged constitutional lecturer, maybe he should try his hand at writing Iraq a new one ... or something else that is non-violent.

Does Baghdad have any decent golf courses?

Me thinks a WALKING STREET would activate some new activity A new tourist centre

Posted

Since when has training puppet government armies ever work? Defense contractors make a ton of $$$, but the puppet troops generally turn tail and run when the cow pucky hits the fan. Same story, different decade. coffee1.gif

Posted

Giving strategy lessons to the Iraqi army is sadly not that effective since theres zero unity, endless factions and interests.

Posted

You can bring a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.

btw, the Brits just announced they're sending 120 'military trainers' to Iraq.

The region now known as Iraq has had armed conflicts for thousands of years. I say 'let 'em stew in their own juices.' Conflicts are going to continue to rage there, no matter what western countries do, or how many western soldiers are sent to the cauldron. Animals have traits. Humans are animals. If some groups of humans suffer constant conflicts, particularly among men between ages 15 and 50, well, that's tough, but they've got to deal with it. They could start by dumping their archaic and mean-spirited belief systems, but they'd sooner die in misery than do that.

A little late for that .now isn't ?

How about if we let them "stew in their own juices"before we went in and destroyed their country?

I think the idea was that we would bring them into the 21st century and they would embrace democracy and develop into countries with societies like ours.

In hindsight, it didn't work. Their religion makes sure their society stays in the middle ages. There are no good options left now. I can't help thinking that sending more and more weapons is just making trouble for ourselves in the future - but politicians don't care about then next 20 years : only the next election.

When we don't need oil any more, all of these problems will disappear. They will go back to farming goats and we will go back to ignoring them.

we went in to bring them in to the 21st century by bombing them in to the stone age?

now it is a big surprise that the country fractured along sectarian lines? like no one warned about that before.

Or that it was a mistake to disband the Republican Guard

Some one else in this thread said " you can not teach brave" like the Iraqi people have some sort of deficiency in the bravery department,

The Iraqi army has being staffed with officers that are incompetent political appointees and have no military experience, soldiers that are led by competent commanders, turn around and run rather than stay and needlessly be slaughtered .

By the way the Ba'ath party was secular.

If a secular democratic Iraq was the goal , we sure went about it the wrong way, as is apparent by the results.

Is it possible that our leaders are that stupid? How can they be so smart on other things but so stupid in this? It does not compute

Train all you want. Iraq no longer exists, what we now have is Kurdistan, Sunnistan, and Shiastan,

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...