Should we have troops on the ground in Iraq?

[Gough]

As the situation becomes more dire by the day, it's looking likely that this is an issue that we will be forced to face. Despite my pacifist instincsts, I'm of the view that if it becomes necessary, then we should. As a part of the so-called coalition of the willing we must shoulder some of the blame as to what is going there at the moment and no matter how distasteful we may find the prospect of Australians coming home in boxes, we must share the burden in trying to rectify the situation and allowing the Iraqis the chance of a peaceful existance. To turn our backs and ignore it would be the cowards way out, we helped to break it, now we help fix it.

 

[little graham]

Do you remember David Hicks Gough? How he trained in NATO camps to fight in Kosovo? Those same camps have been training those now in Iraq apparently causing s**t. Unless the Australian public is told the truth about whats going on, then we should in no way, have any part of this media exercise.

We're in a budget emergency with massive social upheaval as a result. we don't have the money to play these games.

 

[Tasmaniac]

No to any large deployments of tropps on the ground. Transport planes, some fighter strikes and maybe a squadron of SAS doing their thing should be just about our maximum level of commitment (with a reative minimal level of risk).

If western troops are deployed on the ground just see all the islamic crazies (who don't really care that IS is cutting off other muslim's heads) start raving and plenty of them start volunteering for IS.

Ultimately, for the situation is going to be fixed/stabilised, Baghdad needs to make an accomodation with their Sunni's, and if they won't make an accomodation then the situation won't be fixed.

A few thousand Australian solders will make zero difference to that.

Over to you Baghdad.

 

[Hank Scorpion]

It is a tough question.

I don't think we can stick our fingers in our ears as genocide looms, but an attack from the West would only see ISIS gain support.

Provide support to the Iraqi government, in the form of arms, training and reconaissance. Don't send our own troops into combat.

Ideally all support from Western nations is conditional, based on changes to domestic Iraqi government policy which has contributed to the alienation of ISIS members.

 

[little graham]

I

Ideally all support from Western nations is conditional, based on changes to domestic Iraqi government policy which has contributed to the alienation of ISIS members.

So its the Iraqis fault that "Islamic State in Syria" (ISIS) are causing s**t? Nothing to do with we created ISIS to fight in Syria?

 

[Blackas87]

Not sure what sending Australian troops to Iraq to fight ISIS will achieve if we aren't going to fight them in Syria, another disaster created by the U.S

 

[Mofra]

I don't think we can stick our fingers in our ears as genocide looms, but an attack from the West would only see ISIS gain support.

We do so every day in multiple African nations.
We can provide other support, but I'm against troops on the ground.

Not sure what sending Australian troops to Iraq to fight ISIS will achieve if we aren't going to fight them in Syria, another disaster created by the U.S

Agree

 

[benchwarmer5]

Sending troops in is what created this mess in the first place
ISIS didn't have territory before the invasion
Such a mess

 

[Gough]

Perhaps I should qualify my OP and say that this would be a last resort option and should only be considered if other actions fail.

 

[madmug]

When anyone brings up the events of 2003 with the initial invasion & destruction of Iraq, the current pollies dont want to recognise the complete disgrace that whole situation was. Howard & Blair were just lap dogs for the idiot son GWB.
The current situation is TOTALLY their fault.
Yes we now need to help to save lives, but for Abbott to get half a horn over crawling after the USA, it is just pathetic. Our defence personnel are the ones being told to risk their lives simply due to previous lies & incompetency.
It makes one sick.

 

[CLUBMEDhurst]

Hell yeah! It's not as if Islamic State wants to suck the west into a long, drawn out war, or that they were established as part of the anti-US insurgency, or that they gained ascendancy fighting our enemy Assad.

The Yinon Plan writ large

 

[skilts]

It seems a safer option than having them stand upright.

 

[TooFar]

Perhaps I should qualify my OP and say that this would be a last resort option and should only be considered if other actions fail.

Obviously if it is the last resort and the only way to stop direct harm to Australia, then yes, but otherwise no. Meddling in the Middle East is partly the cause of the mess we have today, I can't see direct action now solving the problem.

Im not even comfortable us being with being gun runners for the Kurds.

 

[Hudu Gurusingha]

I reckon the SAS is already on the ground. Their expertise is very highly regarded - its not just a case of making up the numbers. They are the cream of the crop.

Do you remember David Hicks Gough? How he trained in NATO camps to fight in Kosovo? Those same camps have been training those now in Iraq apparently causing s**t. Unless the Australian public is told the truth about whats going on, then we should in no way, have any part of this media exercise.

We're in a budget emergency with massive social upheaval as a result. we don't have the money to play these games.

So what you're trying to say is that its just a made up story and there are no executions, crucifications and beheadings happening as we speak to innocent people? Please.

We have a humanitarian obligation to act here. Its not a 'game' you flog conspiracist, its thousands of innocent people's lives at risk if the west just stands and watches.

 

[DardySingh360]

No.

 

[little graham]

[

We have a humanitarian obligation to act here. I

Why didn't we stop the slaughter in Fallujah in 2004? Why are we not assisting with the emergency still there as result of nuclear contamination from weapons the US used against civilians?

Why did we not condemn ISIS when they used Sarin gas in Syria?

 

[eastfreo75]

I was totally against the second gulf war. This time is different. IS needs to squashed like a bug. You don't let cancer run through your body, you try to get it earlier and don't whatever to stop it.

Saadam Hussein was disarmed in the first gulf war but his plans was only to take over a few small countries around him. IS plans are to wipe out anybody that doesn't agree with their form of Islam.

 

[Malifice]

Oppose. Strongly.

These loons want us to hit them. Its the only way they can get the manpower needed to continue what theyre doing.

Its why they have a coordinated and sophisticated social media campaign.

It needs to come from elsewhere; preferably from another Islamic nation.

 

[Sydney Bloods]

nope * them.

the world cries foul whenever the "west" intervenes in these shitholes, spread lies and misinformation to use it as a rallying cry to support their shithouse administrations.

why should we send young aussies to die when these belligerent arseholes will only us them as scapegoats when war causes casualties.

* THEM, let the entire middle east collapse and be bought under the yoke of the Islamic state.
leave them to rot.

 

[blackcat]

Do you remember David Hicks Gough? How he trained in NATO camps to fight in Kosovo? Those same camps have been training those now in Iraq apparently causing s**t. Unless the Australian public is told the truth about whats going on, then we should in no way, have any part of this media exercise.

We're in a budget emergency with massive social upheaval as a result. we don't have the money to play these games.

alot of them are Republican Guard

 

[Moo]

We helped break it ....so let's help break it even more?

It's not a winnable fight, are we going to chase them into Syria? The only way to keep a lid on it is to be an occupying force in the region (basically forever - as soon as you exit ...it's back to s**t).

The region has to sort itself out, it needs to break into Shia, Sunni, Kurd and perhaps Druz and Alawite.

You only go in with an exit strategy, there is no strategy here.

I'd be careful arming anyone too, when people were calling for the Syrian rebels to be armed ...it comes back (like Afghanistan) to bite you on the arse. Arm the Kurds, can fast become a PKK threat to Turkey and we really don't need to destabilise this border too.

The way to bring ISIS to their knees is to allow the Sunnis to establish their own partitioned homeland (they are anyway)- it will stop the flow of funds to ISIS and then let the Sunnis sort out these shitheads themselves. ISIS is united by common enemies, inside their militants they have massively differing agendas.

Also a little bit of leadership wouldn't go astray, Obama if you are going to bomb the campaigners ...bomb em. I'm fine if the Yanks want to strategically hit em to knock the stuffing out of em and give the Shia's and Kurds breathing space. However at the moment there is no clear leadership out of Washington.

ISIS will naturally be stopped by the Kurds and Shias, they won't sweep it. We don't need to be involved any further than humanitarian aid and airstrikes (but with some direction).

People are going to die in this mess, however they need to sort this out ....it's hard to tell the good guys but IMHO it's easier to make more bad guys.

 

[The Speaker]

Absolutely not.

Arm the Kurds, can fast become a PKK threat to Turkey and we really don't need to destabilise this border too.

The Kurds are the big question mark.

Right now they're starring as the guardian angels of the region. But there's plenty of Kurds in the nations around Iraq that would quite like to be part of a Kurdish nation that could well be fully established in Iraqi Kurdistan in the not too distant future.

 

[blackcat]

nope **** them.

the world cries foul whenever the "west" intervenes in these shitholes, spread lies and misinformation to use it as a rallying cry to support their shithouse administrations.

why should we send young aussies to die when these belligerent arseholes will only us them as scapegoats when war causes casualties.

**** THEM, let the entire middle east collapse and be bought under the yoke of the Islamic state.
leave them to rot.

its cos the West want it both ways.

they want to say to the domestic audience we stay independent. see: the George W Bush running principle in 2000.

but they want to say Right To Protect too, and use this as a mask for intervention.

They want sanctions and nuclear protections, whilst maintaining military power and power projection and the gas geysers flowing

they want stability but the option to foment instability and a putsch,,,




so on a meta level. They want the hypocrisy. AND i WANT the right to sledge them for the hypocrisy. I can accept the geopolitical realism and armies. I can even accept the "big lie". But when they switch the lie with the contradictions, the hypocrisy then is targeted to me as a useful idiot.

 

[MaddAdam]

As the situation becomes more dire by the day, it's looking likely that this is an issue that we will be forced to face. Despite my pacifist instincsts, I'm of the view that if it becomes necessary, then we should. As a part of the so-called coalition of the willing we must shoulder some of the blame as to what is going there at the moment and no matter how distasteful we may find the prospect of Australians coming home in boxes, we must share the burden in trying to rectify the situation and allowing the Iraqis the chance of a peaceful existance. To turn our backs and ignore it would be the cowards way out, we helped to break it, now we help fix it.

A zillion times no.

Troops on the ground is EXACTLY what IS want. In fact, its their only real hope of long term success. If troops go in the Sunni will nail their colours to the mast.

The only way for IS to be defeated is to let them collapse under the weight of their own contradiction - they are too Sunni for the local Sunni.

Degrading their capability by airstrikes is sensible. Ensuring the Iraqi Government gets more "inclusive" and stops providing a "push factor" for the Sunni to support or even tolerate IS is mandatory. But troops on the ground gives them a pull factor.

We saw last time around that sooner (in Middle Eastern terms) rather than later, the local Sunni get jack of being bossed around by foreigners telling them they are not religious enough. When they do again, we should be there to support them as they kick IS out and then to ensure there is a genuine political solution for them to engage with.

 

[MaddAdam]

So its the Iraqis fault that "Islamic State in Syria" (ISIS) are causing s**t? Nothing to do with we created ISIS to fight in Syria?

No we didn't. If anyone "created" ISIS ... and they have a long history ... it was Assad. He certainly gave them a huge boost.