Posted on Oct 10, 2015
Turkey struck by deadliest terrorist attack in modern Turkey’s history.
6.42K
35
46
2
2
0
Turkish authorities blamed the Islamic State for the attack. Will we ever be able to stop ISIS, or is it even possible, is the area to far gone?
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/11/world/europe/ankara-turkey-explosion-deaths.html?_r=0
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/11/world/europe/ankara-turkey-explosion-deaths.html?_r=0
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 18
Capt Seid Waddell
TSgt Jaime Jones, it was not just the senior commanders of the RG that formed the resistance; it was the battle-hardened troops as well. And AQI overplayed their hand in Anbar - and started abusing the Sunnis as well as fighting us; this is what led to the Sunnis joining with us to drive AQI out of Anbar during the surge.
(0)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
I understand your points Capt Seid Waddell and TSgt Jaime Jones. You're not wrong, at say the tactical and operational level. Too often, though, folks look for external reasons why the war in Iraq wasn't as quick and painless as folks like Rumsfeld and others predicted. For that, the U.S. only has the U.S. to blame. The U.S. approached the invasion of Iraq in 2003 without a proper alignment of means, ways, and ends, resulting in a poorly-sourced invasion force without a post-invasion occupation or contingency plan. Turkey not allowing the U.S. to establish a northern front via a ground force invasion may have complicated U.S. efforts, but let's not forget that the U.S. did establish a northern front (as all those combat jump stars from the 173rd for jumping onto a secure airfield evidence); the U.S. decision not to massively expand that northern front was a purely U.S. decision.
(0)
(0)
Capt Seid Waddell
MAJ (Join to see), "... the U.S. decision not to massively expand that northern front was a purely U.S. decision"
Sir, this decision was necessitated by the Turks' refusal to allow the northern invasion forces to cross their territory and the few other options available to us. I still maintain that our NATO "ally" tilted against us and towards Saddam when the chips were down, and they continue to tilt towards the Islamist extremists and against us today.
I have little sympathy for their pain they are experiencing today from the vipers they took into their beds over the past decade and a half. Their chickens are coming home to roost.
Sir, this decision was necessitated by the Turks' refusal to allow the northern invasion forces to cross their territory and the few other options available to us. I still maintain that our NATO "ally" tilted against us and towards Saddam when the chips were down, and they continue to tilt towards the Islamist extremists and against us today.
I have little sympathy for their pain they are experiencing today from the vipers they took into their beds over the past decade and a half. Their chickens are coming home to roost.
(0)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
That's an unfortunate perspective I don't share. We've talked this through; thanks for the discussion.
(1)
(0)
I think that the battle against ISIS needs to be fought state by state. Turkey needs to secure Turkey, Israel secure Israel etc. The problem is the states who cannot secure themselves need intervention from others but aren't always willing to accept it.
(3)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
LCDR (Join to see) problem is the boarders are wide open... I agree that there needs to be a greater state involvement. Wish the involved/affected states would work together against this common threat.
(2)
(0)
LCDR (Join to see)
LTC (Join to see) I agree the borders are a huge issue. As you mention it would be great to have local coalitions, but the reality is most of these states hate each other.
(3)
(0)
PO3 (Join to see)
Did I heard someone said "open border"??? lol guess what topic I am trying to switch to? lol
(0)
(0)
Read This Next