President Obama authorized the U.S. military to send up to 1,500 more troops to Iraq in a non-combat role to help battle the growing threat of ISIS, officials said today. In a statement, the Pentagon said Obama had made the decision “at the request of the Iraqi Government.”…. “This mission will be undertaken in coordination with multiple coalition partners and will be funded through the request for an Iraq Train and Equip fund that the Administration will submit to Congress,” the statement added. The White House stressed that the troops would function “in a non-combat role to train, advise, and assist Iraqi Security Forces, including Kurdish forces.”…. This would almost double the amount of troops in Iraq, bringing the total number of U.S. forces to about 3,100…. “Over the coming weeks, as we finalize the training site locations, the United States will work with coalition members to determine how many U.S. and coalition personnel will be required at each location for the training effort,” the Pentagon said.
I remember hearing once not so very long ago that the war in Iraq was over. The details escape me, but after more than a decade in an immoral war purchased by Captain Codpiece © with lies and propaganda, an end to the war sounded like a pretty good thing. Silly me; you’d think I know better. I’ve spent enough time in the Middle East to know that nothing is ever really settled. Peace is transitory, and war is more or less a permanent state of affairs- sometimes they’re shooting at one another, sometimes they’re not…and it’s never a matter of if, but when.
The news that 1500 U.S. troops are heading to Iraq certainly can’t be considered a positive development. The good news, I suppose, is that we’re not invading Iraq (been there, done that), we’re sending the troops “at the request of the Iraqi Government”…but why is the phrase “slippery slope” stuck in my brain?
I can almost hear the cries of righteous indignation from the Right demanding that this President be held accountable…which I’d be all for, if they meant “being held accountable” in the same way they held George W. Bush’s feet to the fire. Which is to say not at all. Yes, we need to know the what and why of the new deployment and- even more importantly- what the exit strategy and timing is. To think that we could go back into Iraq on an open-ended basis is a recipe for disaster (see Bush, George W.).
I can understand why President Obama might think it important to respond to the Iraqi government’s request for assistance…particularly from a “you broke it, you bought it” perspective. We invaded Iraq on false pretenses, we killed more than 100,000 innocent civilians, so, yeah, I think we have a moral responsibility to respond.
Even with that in mind, I can’t help but remembering that our involvement in Vietnam began with a few advisors and a well-meant desire to assist an ally. Those few advisors culminated in a cluster—k of a war that led to the erection of a wall in Washington, DC, with the names of more than 50,000 Americans who returned home in flag-draped boxes.
Hey, as long as someone else’s kids are doing the fighting and dying….
