4 ms·

Half these Pro-Americans used to hide in Iran before the war, America got outplayed when it comes to the Iraqi government lol

GhettoMaestro 7y ago
As an American, I am curious to hear more about how we were "outplayed" re the Iraqi Gov. Thanks in advance.
- Ahmed90 7y ago
  They got in, shot down Saddam, got a bunch of anti-Saddam parties and gave them power... most of them were hiding in Iran or worked with Iran during the Iraq/Iran war they didn't understand the powerplay by Iran, they kept struggling with troops in or out whos who etc... withdrawn and left the incompetent government alone, gave Iran, even more, breathing space to take over
- parsimo2010 7y ago
  1. USA ousts Saddam Hussein, and is obligated to help Iraq transition to a democratic government (because they invasion was done under the pretext of liberating a country from a mad dictator with weapons of mass destruction, instead of the commonly cited argument of securing resources for the American empire). 2. USA backs a candidate and initially gets a government elected that is favorable to the USA. However, these politicians turn out to be kind of scummy and screw up just about everything. 3. Iran realizes that elections can be influenced (they watched the USA influence the first election), and having lots of paramilitary type forces that are trained in information operations, decides to capitalize. They flood across the porous border to spread propaganda (the current scumbags in government make it so the Iranian propaganda doesn't even have to lie, it just has to point out how much the current guys suck). 4. Iraqi citizens, growing sick of the crappy politicians they elected initially, start listening to the propaganda and elect a government friendly to Iran. This is the first time this has happened in a long time, Iraq has not been allies with Iran for several decades. 5. End result- USA invades, eventually loses influence to Iran. The global hegemony USA got outplayed by a regional hegemony because they backed unethical and incompetent sellouts rather than finding a good candidate.
  - dsfyu404ed 7y ago
    I fail to see how this isn't a win for the US. The Iraqis get a less terrible government no matter who it is and we get to wash our hands of the situation without pissing off Israel or the Saudis.
    - parsimo2010 7y ago
      It's not a win for the USA because one of their enemies gained influence in the region. It's really as simple as that, but: The invasion also led to the rise of ISIS, which is widely seen as a embarrassment to the USA because they were supposed to be rebuilding a country and ended up allowing a large and deadly terrorist group to form under their noses. And just to add on, there are literal losses as well. When the Iraqi army retreated from Mosul in 2014, they left behind a bunch of US supplied equipment that ISIS took control of. Iraq has "lost" at least a billion dollars of military equipment in recent years, most of which has been taken by ISIS and enabled terrorism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_Mosul https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_Mosul https://www.newsweek.com/us-military-lost-track-1-billion-worth-weapons-and-equipment-report-614391 https://www.newsweek.com/us-military-lost-track-1-billion-wo...
      - perl4ever 7y ago
        "Iraq has "lost" at least a billion dollars of military equipment in recent years" That's...one tenth of one percent of the cost (to the US) of the war.
        lawnchair_larry 7y ago
        That’s the wrong measure by a long shot. If I lose a $2000 rifle, and that rifle is then used to massacre a school, was the loss a mere $2000?
        perl4ever 7y ago
        If you lost a thousand $2000 rifles, then the loss was a "mere" 0.1%. Plus or minus an order of magnitude (or two). I mean, like, you are implying the other 99.9% of spending on the war was harmless or salutary?

GhettoMaestro 7y ago

As an American, I am curious to hear more about how we were "outplayed" re the Iraqi Gov. Thanks in advance.

Ahmed90 7y ago
They got in, shot down Saddam, got a bunch of anti-Saddam parties and gave them power... most of them were hiding in Iran or worked with Iran during the Iraq/Iran war they didn't understand the powerplay by Iran, they kept struggling with troops in or out whos who etc... withdrawn and left the incompetent government alone, gave Iran, even more, breathing space to take over
parsimo2010 7y ago
1. USA ousts Saddam Hussein, and is obligated to help Iraq transition to a democratic government (because they invasion was done under the pretext of liberating a country from a mad dictator with weapons of mass destruction, instead of the commonly cited argument of securing resources for the American empire). 2. USA backs a candidate and initially gets a government elected that is favorable to the USA. However, these politicians turn out to be kind of scummy and screw up just about everything. 3. Iran realizes that elections can be influenced (they watched the USA influence the first election), and having lots of paramilitary type forces that are trained in information operations, decides to capitalize. They flood across the porous border to spread propaganda (the current scumbags in government make it so the Iranian propaganda doesn't even have to lie, it just has to point out how much the current guys suck). 4. Iraqi citizens, growing sick of the crappy politicians they elected initially, start listening to the propaganda and elect a government friendly to Iran. This is the first time this has happened in a long time, Iraq has not been allies with Iran for several decades. 5. End result- USA invades, eventually loses influence to Iran. The global hegemony USA got outplayed by a regional hegemony because they backed unethical and incompetent sellouts rather than finding a good candidate.
- dsfyu404ed 7y ago
  I fail to see how this isn't a win for the US. The Iraqis get a less terrible government no matter who it is and we get to wash our hands of the situation without pissing off Israel or the Saudis.
  - parsimo2010 7y ago
    It's not a win for the USA because one of their enemies gained influence in the region. It's really as simple as that, but: The invasion also led to the rise of ISIS, which is widely seen as a embarrassment to the USA because they were supposed to be rebuilding a country and ended up allowing a large and deadly terrorist group to form under their noses. And just to add on, there are literal losses as well. When the Iraqi army retreated from Mosul in 2014, they left behind a bunch of US supplied equipment that ISIS took control of. Iraq has "lost" at least a billion dollars of military equipment in recent years, most of which has been taken by ISIS and enabled terrorism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_Mosul https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_Mosul https://www.newsweek.com/us-military-lost-track-1-billion-worth-weapons-and-equipment-report-614391 https://www.newsweek.com/us-military-lost-track-1-billion-wo...
    - perl4ever 7y ago
      "Iraq has "lost" at least a billion dollars of military equipment in recent years" That's...one tenth of one percent of the cost (to the US) of the war.
      - lawnchair_larry 7y ago
        That’s the wrong measure by a long shot. If I lose a $2000 rifle, and that rifle is then used to massacre a school, was the loss a mere $2000?
        perl4ever 7y ago
        If you lost a thousand $2000 rifles, then the loss was a "mere" 0.1%. Plus or minus an order of magnitude (or two). I mean, like, you are implying the other 99.9% of spending on the war was harmless or salutary?