In a new interview with the Associated Press, Iraqi Prime Minister Hayder Abadi ruled out any move to send ground troops to Iraq to engage in combat, insisting they would be unwelcome.
“We don’t want them. We won’t allow them,” declared Abadi, who said he was fine with the ongoing US airstrikes against ISIS but found it “puzzling” that the US had excluded Iran from the Paris summit on ISIS Monday.
Abadi’s comments come just days after Iraqi President Massoum had commented that the US recruitment of Saudi Arabia and the UAE to join the air war were likewise unwelcome.
That suggests a growing disconnect between the partnership the Iraqi government is envisioning in the ISIS war, and what the Obama Administration intends to do.
Internally the US appears divided on the ground operation, with President Obama continuing to rule out any ground combat, despite sending 1,600 ground troops, and more and more Pentagon officials saying they believe such a shift is likely or, according to Army Chief Gen. Ray Odierno, inevitable.
That Iraq might not want the US to resume its ground operations in the country doesn’t appear to have entered into the calculation so far, as officials have seemed to take Iraqi acquiescence to whatever they choose to do for granted, thus far without very good results.
This is great news. Hopefully the Iraqis will be able to enforce the ban on U.S. ground forces.
Not only US ground troops but Saudis/UAE troops as well, these regimes are the reasons for present and past problems created for Iraqi and Syrian people. As Israel fascist regime is the problem for Palestinians the Saudis and UAE regimes are for Arab nations.
YOU CAN;T rule out Iranian influence in Irak as Shia regimes are stretched to Syria, Lebanon and Irak due to American policies and now it,s too late.
This game of america is counter productive first support them and then wipe out how long?
Could it possibly be that Abadi sees through was is obviously complete and absolute bull—-?
Perfection
A three state solution, with the Shia, Sunni and Kurd tribes each getting the land that they predominantly occupy, with an international peace keeping force patrolling the borders and resolving disputes.
Comes now quite the reverse, with deadly force unlimited, bombs unending and an all-out effort to force people together knowing full well that it will maximize the need for bombs, namely maximize the imperative need of our Empire for the profit in trading Iraq oil for made in USA bombs.
This is interesting, to say the least. The putative justification for fighting ISIS/ISIL in the first place was/is to protect the Baghdad government's control of Iraq – well, as much as they controlled before ISIS/ISIL started taking cities anyway. So, if the Iraqi government is declaring that the US cannot send ground troops in to "save Baghdad" then there is no legal justification for doing such, is there?
Are McCrazy and Grahamcrackers going to insist that the US "invade" Iraq again? The first invasion obviously worked so well, might as well double-down. I mean they have no problems insisting we invade other sovereign countries (Syria and Iran) so why not, eh?
If the USG has been concerned about world opinion (and I personally don't think they have) about all the misdirected and mismanaged adventures the US, if they decide to insert ground troops despite the Iraqi government refusal to play along, the world community should rightly come unglued and start ICC proceedings to bring some of the people responsible to court. And the American people, despite their demonstrated ambivalence should start to seriously question those we elected to serve us – and remove them when they refuse to answer or lie to us…again.
Yes, it would be a good thing. And yes it would be nice. Like many other good and nice things, however, it is highly unlikely to happen. Just like it's highly unlikely that USA will respect the wishes of Iraq. What's a little bit of the flesh and blood of other peoples kid's when there's so much money to be made there?
Unfortunately, you are most likely correct. Sad state of affairs, no doubt.
Can't say as I blame them, after the disaster that followed the last round of US meddling in Iraq.
So this would be what, the third time? The final installment in the failed "Iraq War Trilogy"?
I bet the Iraqis wish more than anything else they had the destructive capabilities to keep the warmongering scumbags the hell out of their poor country more than anything else.
US ground troops are very welcome at yankee & red socks games also at football games where the players are more fierce than the troops apparently