Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

bigtree

(93,774 posts)
27. that's a reasonable expectation
Fri Aug 8, 2014, 12:42 PM
Aug 2014

. . .I would note that there may be a question of the reliability or effectiveness of the Peshmerga, essentially the Kurdish army, in maintaining that rollback. Indeed, it's a question right now why those forces have been ineffective in protecting these civilians on their own, or in concert with other Iraqi forces - or are seen as such - when ISIS/ISIL has been described as a relatively small force... even with the weaponry the insurgents seized, they are less experienced and less equipped than those Kurdish forces were advertized as being.

One explanation why they haven't been sufficient in resisting the insurgents may well be that the capability of the Kurdish force has been inflated in reports beyond their actual ability.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

What US personnel are in Erbil? Are they at the Mosul Dam? morningfog Aug 2014 #1
You don't think we should protect our personnel in Erbil? TwilightGardener Aug 2014 #2
We shouldn't have any personnel there. morningfog Aug 2014 #4
But we do. Diplomatic personnel and military advisors were moved there. TwilightGardener Aug 2014 #6
we're not supposed to have diplomatic relations with the Kurds? renegade000 Aug 2014 #8
So we bomb anywhere anytime there is a threat "near" a US consulate? morningfog Aug 2014 #13
well, i guess we can have Erbil become the new Benghazi renegade000 Aug 2014 #24
Erbil houses our diplomatic mission to the Kurdish Autonomous Region. Laelth Aug 2014 #53
Like Money, Sir, Destruction Of Military Assets Is Fungible The Magistrate Aug 2014 #3
I didn't suggest it wasn't. morningfog Aug 2014 #5
Then No Point In Hinting At 'Bait And Switch' In A Header, Sir The Magistrate Aug 2014 #10
I just want to keep track of the reasons for our attacks. morningfog Aug 2014 #14
"Near U.S. personnel" is obtuse and ever so fungible.....no debating the wide latitude that gives. Fred Sanders Aug 2014 #9
Alas, the range of modern artillery makes it less obtuse and fungible.nt stevenleser Aug 2014 #18
I notice the advancements in military hardware also, the better it gets the more civilians die. Fred Sanders Aug 2014 #20
certainly within the President's order bigtree Aug 2014 #17
We Can Speak Clearly, Sir, I Expect, To One Another The Magistrate Aug 2014 #22
that's a reasonable expectation bigtree Aug 2014 #27
When It Comes To Cases, Sir, 'Peshmerga' Are Green The Magistrate Aug 2014 #29
again, a reasonable view. Thank you for your answers bigtree Aug 2014 #34
The Kurds were stretched thin in the area while building a new border.. EX500rider Aug 2014 #39
thanks for that perspective bigtree Aug 2014 #44
America is using "near U.S.personell" as the justification for air strikes, eh? Kind of like reverse Fred Sanders Aug 2014 #7
Except That Is Not What Is Being done, Sir The Magistrate Aug 2014 #11
The power not to get a joke and turn ones own misunderstanding into a treatise is what is cynical. Fred Sanders Aug 2014 #12
Bob Would Be Ashamed Of You, Sir The Magistrate Aug 2014 #15
So Bob's your uncle? Fred Sanders Aug 2014 #16
Sold My Soul Long Ago, Sir The Magistrate Aug 2014 #19
This OP should be titled "I'm hunting for a reason to be outraged" stevenleser Aug 2014 #21
I don't think that's fair bigtree Aug 2014 #23
If those supporting it were reaching in their justifications like this, they would deserve similar stevenleser Aug 2014 #26
This is not our fight. morningfog Aug 2014 #28
It is our fight....see below. nt msanthrope Aug 2014 #33
Idiot-boy's war crime made it our responsibility. We screwed that country. stevenleser Aug 2014 #40
We rightfully withdrew our troops. We should stay out. morningfog Aug 2014 #45
it's not bullshit Steve bigtree Aug 2014 #30
This OP attempts to assert that we are going outside of the President's announced boundaries last stevenleser Aug 2014 #41
the only manufactured outrage I see is your own bigtree Aug 2014 #43
I'm sure most people can see the OP for what it is. An attempt to Manufacture Outrage. nt stevenleser Aug 2014 #46
give it a fucking rest bigtree Aug 2014 #47
Feel free to trash it steve. No deleting, no reason to. morningfog Aug 2014 #25
no reason to delete, at all, morningfog bigtree Aug 2014 #31
You know, I got arrested outside the fucking Iraqi Embassy in the 1980's protesting msanthrope Aug 2014 #32
This is not the 1980s, not chemical weapons, not Saddam Hussein morningfog Aug 2014 #35
It's still Kurdistan, and you know what? Taking out ISIS artillery is the most humane msanthrope Aug 2014 #37
I am opposing the renewed use if the US military morningfog Aug 2014 #38
Hey....morningfog....taking out artillery aimed at civilians IS true humanitarianism. msanthrope Aug 2014 #42
But that isn't the proffered justification. It is to protect US personnel and facilities "near" morningfog Aug 2014 #48
Yes....who do you think is delivering the aid? You take out the artillery so that msanthrope Aug 2014 #51
Missing the point I think RunInCircles Aug 2014 #36
Yeah, we're bombing ISIS to protect Erbil and not the Yazidi's stranded on Mt Sinjar neverforget Aug 2014 #49
Even more, we are protecting US interests in Erbil and nothing more. morningfog Aug 2014 #50
K&R Watch what they do, not what they say. woo me with science Aug 2014 #52
Important OP. Kick. woo me with science Aug 2014 #54
kick woo me with science Aug 2014 #55
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»US forces in combat in Ir...»Reply #27