The Iraqi army that disintegrated under an onslaught by Islamist fighters this week was a hollow force, riven by corruption, poor leadership and sectarian splits - a shadow of the military Washington had hoped to leave in the war-ravaged country.

The United States dismantled Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein’s military after invading in 2003 and spent $20 billion to build up a new 800,000-strong force, banking on its ability to keep the peace when the US military withdrew in 2011.

While the 2003 decision to disband Iraq’s army led to a bloody civil war, Iraqi forces were seen as generally competent by 2011 and sectarian fighting had eased, giving US President Barack Obama some confidence as he pulled out all American forces. But corruption sapped funds meant for soldiers’ rations, for maintaining vehicles and for fuel, said an Iraqi officer in Sunni-dominated Anbar Province, parts of which have been out of government control for more than six months. Senior military posts are frequently for sale, and soldiers go to local markets to buy spare parts because government stores are empty, he said.

The Iraqi force has also been heavily politicized under Shi’ite Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, said Retired Lieutenant General Jim Dubik, who led the US and NATO effort to train Iraqi forces from 2007 to 2008. “Their leadership has eroded,” said Dubik, who is now a senior fellow at the Institute for the Study of War in Washington. “If you’re a fighter and you think your side’s going to lose, you don’t fight until the last man. You save yourself.”

http://www.nation.com.pk/international/15-Jun-2014/iraqi-military-breakdown-fuelled-by-corruption-politics

He believed it would be so easy

Blair (and his entire family for that matter) are nothing but "me-first"ers.

He saw an opportunity for personal gain - which has been his primary driver throughout
his political life - and took it.

To Hell with the poor victims of his & George's little adventure on behalf of Halliburton et al.

If there is a Hell - which his own "conversion" supports - I truly hope that Blair rots in it
in eternal agony for his actions.

For his rotting corpse.

He needs an Oliver Cromwell moment

On 30 January 1661, (the 12th anniversary of the execution of Charles I), Cromwell's body was exhumed from Westminster Abbey, and was subjected to the ritual of a posthumous execution, as were the remains of Robert Blake, John Bradshaw and Henry Ireton. (The body of Cromwell's daughter was allowed to remain buried in the Abbey.) His disinterred body was hanged in chains at Tyburn, and then thrown into a pit, while his severed head was displayed on a pole outside Westminster Hall until 1685.

IRBIL, Iraq -- When Islamic militants rampaged through the Iraqi city of Mosul last week, robbing banks of hundreds of millions of dollars, opening the gates of prisons and burning army vehicles, some residents greeted them as if they were liberators and threw rocks at retreating Iraqi soldiers.

It took only two days, though, for the fighters of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant to issue edicts laying out the harsh terms of Islamic law under which they would govern, and singling out some police officers and government workers for summary execution.

With just a few thousand fighters, the group's lightning sweep into Mosul and farther south appeared to catch many Iraqi and U.S. officials by surprise. But the gains actually were the realization of a yearslong strategy of state-building that the group itself promoted publicly.

"What we see in Iraq today is in many ways a culmination of what the ISI has been trying to accomplish since its founding in 2006," said Brian Fishman, a counterterrorism researcher at the New America Foundation, referring to the Islamic State in Iraq, the predecessor of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.

http://www.post-gazette.com/news/world/2014/06/15/Rebels-fast-strike-in-Iraq-was-years-in-the-making-2-lines-of-22-pt/stories/201406150179

Face it Tony, by removing Saddam, you and Bush caused this.

This guy is going to rot in Hell. He's more skilled at covering up for pedophiles in his administration than protecting anyone from imaginary terrorists.

---

Most of these people are Sunni Muslims. They resent their country's government and fear Iraq's leaders will bomb Mosul to flush the militants out.

Umm Muhammed and Shohaib Musahem left Mosul on Saturday, but told us the militants, known as ISIS, are doing a good job of running the city.

Would they like ISIS to be the government of Iraq?

Yes, Musahem said. We need them, because they're doing great things

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/iraqis-flee-fighting-but-support-insurgents/

The push towards Baghdad has now completely stalled, as security forces and volunteers appear to be fighting back effectively in some areas.

According to various reports, at least 349 people were killed and 33 more were wounded today. Some of the reports cannot be independently confirmed and should be taken as estimates, particularly those in occupied cities.

The Peshmerga ministry of the Kurdish Autonomous Region claimed that troops were in almost all disputed areas outside the K.A.R.

Troops and militiamen retook Ishaqi today but also found 12 burnt bodies belonging to policemen. The deputy head of the Shi’ite Endowment came under attack while traveling near the city on his way to Samarra; eight guards were killed and 10 more were wounded.

http://original.antiwar.com/updates/2014/06/14/iraq-hundreds-killed-as-security-forces-and-volunteers-start-to-push-back/

The US former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has said the United States should not intervene in Iraq as PM Nouri al-Maliki's administration was unable to function for all Iraqis despite US support, Anadolu agency reported.

Referring to the Iraqi government, Clinton said on Friday: "You'd be fighting for a dysfunctional, unrepresentative, authoritarian government."

"There's no reason on earth that I know of that we would ever sacrifice a single American life for that."

Speaking at George Washington University during an event covering her newly released book, Hard Choices, Clinton spoke on a range of issues including the European financial crisis, the tension in the Pacific and the influence of the US in the world.

http://en.trend.az/regions/met/iraq/2285380.html

And of course, she is right.

Referring to the Iraqi government, Clinton said on Friday: "You'd be fighting for a dysfunctional, unrepresentative, authoritarian government."

Can Obama pull a Nixon with the Iraq crisis?

For the United States, the Iraq war ranks as the most consequential foreign policy failure since Vietnam. In neither instance did U.S. forces succumb to outright defeat, of course. In both, with victory proving elusive, Americans wearied of the fight and simply walked away, abandoning the people for whom their troops had ostensibly fought.

In terms of outcomes, however, these two conflicts differ in crucial respects. In Vietnam, we quit and got away with it. Lyndon Johnson's recklessness in expanding the war found its counterpart in Richard Nixon's cynicism in ending it. When after a mere three years of "peace with honor" the Republic of Vietnam collapsed, Americans shrugged.

In Southeast Asia, many people — Vietnamese, Cambodians, Laotians — paid (and continue to pay) for the havoc that the United States wreaked there. By comparison, even taking into account the 58,000 American dead, this country paid next to nothing. Strategically, the United States got off scot-free. Committing to memory the war's canonical lesson — "No more Vietnams" — Americans moved on. That was that.

Iraq offers a striking contrast. Considerably smaller in scale than Vietnam, America's misadventure in Iraq has already given rise to vastly larger strategic implications. There, recklessness has found its counterpart not in cynicism but in an unfathomable combination of naivete and listlessness. The recklessness was that of George W. Bush. The naivete and listlessness — grandiose talk seldom translating into concerted action — have become the hallmarks of Barack Obama's approach to statecraft.

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-0615-bacevich-iraq-failure-vietnam-20140615-story.html#navtype=outfit

I can't stand Blair, never could. Even leaving Iraq aside, he shifted the Labour party massively to the right, pursued centre-right policies even when the Tories were in no condition to force him to do so, began the destruction of the NHS that the current vandals-in-charge are finishing and created the "New Deal", a system to force the unemployed into daily makework in the hopes that it would be so frustrating that they'd magically find jobs.

And the Downing Street Memos proved that the snivelling little bastard knew the case for the Iraq war was lacking from the very beginning. Shitehawk should spend his days shuttling between The Hague and a jail cell.

100,000 concurrent life sentences with no parole would be a conservative sentence.

Got away with literal murder.

Maybe that's the only way he can sleep at night.

Blair, the 2003 invasion had everything to do with what is going on now you ignorant ass!


Why are Blair, Bush and Bush cronies walking around free and clear after causing the deaths of 150,000+ people in Iraq?!

Ugh.

BECAUSE THEY WERE NEVER HELD ACCOUNTABLE......don't you remember, we were advised we needed to LOOK FORWARD

strange as it might seem the Kurds may well be the best hope Iraq has for stability, that is if they don't decide to cut the rest of Iraq loose and establish Kurdistan in the north where they have a rare mix- both oil and water

... isn't only a river in Egypt, Tony B-LIAR.

With Syria completely destroyed and no need to supply weapons to rebels by Qatar & Saudi Arabia, the situation would look different, but I'm not sure exactly how.

Bush's poodle to the bitter end

the statement even more. Sickening.

I am incensed that these guys don't even feel a drop of accountability for their decisions - it shows you how arrogant they are.

history past 1882/1930s/1947/1991/2003

Still, I wonder if Blair, the US faithful French Puddle, can still roll-over and play dead?

His comment on the issue just doesn't resonate the same 11 years later.

Same thing her. We can't know what would have happened if there had been no 2003 Bush-Blair invasion, but we can be sure that the invasion made chaos a certainty.

and we unleashed sectarian violence by looking the other way as foreigners, mostly our friends the Saudis, came in to stir the pot.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/nov/23/iraq.saudiarabia

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/22/world/middleeast/22fighters.html?pagewanted=all

-leaving nothing in its place but a useless right-wing anti-worker invasion cult.

He needs to join the Tories and be done with it.

You're a frightened little man who's going to be looking over his shoulder for the rest of his life.

for crimes against humanity along with *co.

Ah, the role of labels in propaganda.



But, a Poodle is a Poodle is a Poodle.

Honestly, this guy should have been sent to the Hague along with Bush. They have so much blood on their hands it's unbelievable.

Go away Blair.

I guess "bizarre" is in the eye of the beholder. It is certainly not bizarre to suggest that the ill advised invasion of Iraq destabilized it to the point of civil war which has really never been resolved, in spite of "surges" and other face saving adventures drummed up by Bush and Blair.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-186158/Blair-defends-Iraq-dossier.html

From my perspective we should never have gotten involved and everyday we spent there (including Obama's admin) only served to bloody our hands. We served no purpose except to participate in the bloodshed and the death of the innocent and guilty. We gazed into the abyss...