A very important article to read:

[kentuck]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-we-stuck-with-maliki--and-lost-iraq/2014/07/03/0dd6a8a4-f7ec-11e3-a606-946fd632f9f1_story.html?hpid=z2

<snip>
To understand why Iraq is imploding, you must understand Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki — and why the United States has supported him since 2006.

I have known Maliki, or Abu Isra, as he is known to people close to him, for more than a decade. I have traveled across three continents with him. I know his family and his inner circle. When Maliki was an obscure member of parliament, I was among the very few Americans in Baghdad who took his phone calls. In 2006, I helped introduce him to the U.S. ambassador, recommending him as a promising option for prime minister. In 2008, I organized his medevac when he fell ill, and I accompanied him for treatment in London, spending 18 hours a day with him at Wellington Hospital. In 2009, I lobbied skeptical regional royals to support Maliki’s government.

By 2010, however, I was urging the vice president of the United States and the White House senior staff to withdraw their support for Maliki. I had come to realize that if he remained in office, he would create a divisive, despotic and sectarian government that would rip the country apart and devastate American interests.

America stuck by Maliki. As a result, we now face strategic defeat in Iraq and perhaps in the broader Middle East.

....more - long article but very educational.

[GeorgeGist]

1. America stuck by Bush.

As a result, we now face strategic defeat in Iraq and in the broader Middle East.

[kentuck]

4. It is true that Bush Administration helped to put Maliki into power...

Which was a big mistake.

When it came time to negotiate the SOFA (agreement) the Iraqis had completely turned against the Americans and had sided with Iran.

The article does a very good job at describing the different personalities involved in the struggle for power.

I get the impression that Maliki will never leave his position voluntarily.

[TwilightGardener]

2. The author is tooting his own horn, and also is just as arrogantly wrong

as everyone who was involved in Iraq throughout the war. We could never successfully rig up a government in Iraq that would yield instant, peaceful and workable "democracy" there, no matter how many puppets we introduced and substituted. Iraqis will sort themselves out as they will--and we also can't stop Iran's influence.

[malaise]

3. Ali Khedery has no credibility - never did

I volunteered to serve in Iraq after watching the tragedy of 9/11 from the Texas governor’s conference room.

9/11 had nothing to do with Iraq - he's a tool. Fugg him.

[kentuck]

5. Maybe so but...?

..if you read between the lines, you can glean a lot of information that is not readily available to the public. For example, it was the Bush Administration that helped to put Maliki into power. That is an important point. Also, the purpose of the "surge" was to turn the Sunnis against al Qaeda and the Americans were able to do that with money, moreso than with the military. Then the Sunnis were dismissed by Maliki. Maliki and his henchmen never had any idea of keeping Americans in Iraq once he consolidated his power.

[malaise]

6. Yes there is information

but he can't be trusted. He's thinks Obama's Iraq policy is a disaster. - he who thought Maliki was the solution. I detest these name calling members of the political class. They are way too self important for me.

[kentuck]

9. That is true but...

..he was an inside player for many years. Naturally, he would like to blame it all on Obama but it was not Obama that helped put Maliki into power. I have no doubt but that he knew a lot of the players in the Iraq mess and that he was one of them. Still, I found it very informative.

[malaise]

10. I don't trust those folks kentuck

but you're right that we got some inside information.

[kentuck]

12. We don't need to trust them...

to understand where they are coming from.

[bemildred]

7. Although it reeks of butt covering, yes, it is interesting.

He does admit, at the end, that it was always folly.

[lovuian]

8. Malaki is Bush's man all the way

and is he the Saudis man too

[RobertEarl]

11. We should appoint a King of Iraq

GWB would be a most excellent choice.

We have a castle there, let's put bush in his proper place.