.
Now, from this result we can make postulate some intelligent results (particularly when contrasted with Kurdish results):
.
1) The Iraqi Army isn't concerned with holding Ramadi
2) US money and training don't overcome Iraqi lack of interest in holding this city (and quite possible many others)
3) This "fight" isn't worth losing their lives over to them. (Question: So why is it "worth" losing American lives over?)
.
Now, what many of our Congress people have apparently learned is:
.
John McCain “George W. Bush at least had the guts to reverse and respond with the surge. I wish, I pray, Barack Obama would do the same thing,” link
To which I ask, "If the Iraqis won't fight for Ramadi, why should we?"
.
Former Bush Officials testified to Congress that we need 20,000 troops right now to fight ISIS. These were the architects of the surge and want a new surge. They found a Congress that agrees. (link)
To which I say, the architects of the surge ORIGINALLY (2007) said it was a short term solution to give Iraqis breathing room for their own fights. It didn't work then over the long term, why would it work now?
.
Presidential Candidate Lindsey Graham would like an additional 10,000 Americans there right now. (link) .
As near as I can figure, because it is a nice round number.
.
Other, less reasonable Presidential Candidates are spouting horse-shit, but that is because their comments are consequence free. Pay them no mind.