4 ms·
Not exactly, but instead along these lines: The US civil administrator of Iraq fired 400 000 Army men, majority sunni. Now, you have 400 000 families with no fo
by jacobush 9y ago
Not exactly, but instead along these lines:
The US civil administrator of Iraq fired 400 000 Army men, majority sunni. Now, you have 400 000 families with no food on the table.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Bremer#Disbanding_the_Iraqi_Army https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Bremer#Disbanding_the_Ira...
Cue 15 years of chaos and strife, and the ISIS has fertile ground to sow their seeds of hatred in. A significant fraction of these disgruntled 400 000 army men apparently decided to lend their services to ISIS.
Edit:
to voiceless down voters - of course your standpoint is that doing the above was of no consequence, or maybe even helped delay the creation of ISIS? So absurd...
Edit2:
Se child comment.
- dba7dba 9y agoI always wanted to know who made the idiotic decision to disband the ENTIRE Iraqi army. Was it from the white house or someone in Iraq like P. Beemer? A lot of the ills of Iraq after Saddam fell was due to disbanding of the army. Imho.
- jacobush 9y ago”On May 23, 2003, Bremer issued Order Number 2, in effect dissolving the entire former Iraqi army[40] and putting 400,000 former Iraqi soldiers out of work.” As for who made him do it, I don’t know. But as you said, it was idiotic. And that’s worse than evil. Dietrich Bonhoeffer would agree with me.
- wolco 9y agoI'm not sure it was a bad move. Leaving the army and power structures in place would have created conditions for a civil war that could have spilled over the entire region. Leaving the defeated minority population to continue ruling over the south and kurds would have been a blood bath. Disbanding created isis but not disbanding would have been worse. We'll never know how worse things could have gotten.
- icebraining 9y agoI think the downvotes come from the perceived motte-and-bailey argument. Your point that disbanding the US army is likely to have decisively contributed to the creation of ISIS is good, but it's a far cry from the claim that the US literally airlifted ISIS commanders, so in this context it's not appropriate.
- jacobush 9y agoPoint taken
- lumberingjack 9y agoWhen I was in Iraq we tried to give them jobs doing construction, food preparation, auto repair, ECT. But they all proved to be untrustworthy, taking the money and not doing their jobs or worse sabotage due to extreme idealization. It reminded me of the people of Detroit. That is why we disbanded them they could not be trusted to be organized holding guns at a moments notice they would switch sides and shoot at you.
- baybal2 9y agoMaking the IS took more than US just disbanding the Iraqi army. Their first issue came with US instating the government that was incompetent, arrogant, and corrupt at the same time. Even if the original Iraqi militants had no recruits from the army, the would have still a source of credibility to latch on - the hated new Iraqi government If USA did bother to do just a dime more work on Iraqi welfare than was needed to prevent food riots, and spent more money on Iraq than the initial reconstruction funds, no militant group would simply be there. I see people will write something like "but US gave N gazillions to Iraqi government for reconstruction." Yes, they gave their N gazillions that were mostly spent by Iraqi officials on buying Cognac and property in UAE