Home | About | Donate

Washington Asks, “Who lost Ramadi?” But Washington Never Had Ramadi


Washington Asks, “Who lost Ramadi?” But Washington Never Had Ramadi

Juan Cole

The inside-the-Beltway debate set off by the fall of the Iraqi city of Ramadi to Daesh (ISIS, ISIL) on Sunday is, as usual, Dadaistic in its disconnection from reality. Republican talking points blame Barack Obama for withdrawing US troops from Iraq in 2011, as though Daesh suddenly began in 2012. The GOP figures typically don’t mention that it was George W. Bush who set the end of 2011 as the date for a total US withdrawal from Iraq, because that was all he could get from the Iraqi parliament.


Should have just left Saddam in charge. Sure he was a bloody tyrant, but at least nobody got out of line. The Iraqi army couldn’t defeat the USC cheerleaders at this point.


I agree. There’s no reason to give Cole a forum. Perhaps he once was an objective critic, but those days are long gone.


Unless I just missed it in the “fine print” somewhere, this self-appointed liberal pundit never even mentions Iraqi casualties, which is a sadly common tactic among establishment liberals who view Iraq as just another political fight between Republicans and Democrats rather than as a war crime.

It becomes more and more obvious that if it conflicts with the Washington consensus regarding foreign policy and America’s right to impose its will on the world through violence, the liberal establishment’s concern with racism and the lives of people of color is a domestic political issue, not a genuine philosophical conviction.


By some unwritten rule, only the administration and the opposition Republicans can tell us, the American public, why we are losing another war. The Obama answer is that we’re not losing, that Ramadi is only another temporary setback. The Republican opposition says that we need to get Vietnam-style numbers of boots on the ground into Syria, and bomb Iran too.

We might go back to Vietnam-style political rhetoric. Lyndon Baines Johnson would say that the had to win the hearts and minds of the Vietnamese people, which is great American rhetoric. In practice we found the biggest drug kingpins in Vietnam and made them Vietnam’s leaders, sometimes by rigged elections, sometimes by coups. Also we killed 2 million little Vietnamese. In Iraq we killed how many? We tortured how many in Abu Grahib and elsewhere? So the little people learned to say “yes” when asked if their hearts and minds were pro-American.


Released under the FOIA act a US Report from the DIA that predates the appearance of ISIS.

This during the Presidency of Barack Obama.

The report anticipates a Salafist organization comprised of Fundamentalists and mentions the Saudis , Turks , Israeli’s and Americans as promoting and supporting this group with the aim of isolating the Government of Syria so as to hasten its collapse and trigger an intervention.

Remember that before they were called Daesh which an Arabic word, they were called ISIS which an Anglicized term and which was likely thought up by some think tank when the group formed by those same Countries.

ISIS is a US/allied operation which does exactly as this report desired.

They are not an unintended consequence