Return to Ramadi: US forces should not re-fight an old battle

Defense Secretary Ashton B. Carter’s statement last week that America is ready to provide attack helicopters and field advisers to help the Iraqi government free Ramadi from control of the Islamic State group is astonishing.

Carter seems to be unaware that most Americans are tired of U.S. participation in Middle Eastern wars. They supported President George W. Bush’s 2008 agreement with the Iraqi government that U.S. forces be withdrawn by the end of 2011. The 3,500 who remain today are in principle in a training capacity.

It is also unclear how the re-taking of Ramadi fits into any overall regional approach to a campaign to defeat the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. If one exists, the American people are not aware of it. Congress still refuses to debate and vote on U.S. policy in the Middle East, unwilling to get its political feathers singed.

Americans fought and died once already to liberate Ramadi during the Sunni uprising. To do it again would be re-fighting the same Iraqi battle. For what?

Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi has stated flatly that he does not want foreign troops to fight his country’s wars. The United States supports al-Abadi in general, particularly in his desire to take responsibility for what happens in Iraq.

So what lies behind Carter’s intention to expose more U.S. personnel to combat in Iraq? Is it to balance out any Iranian forces that al-Abadi might invite into his country? Is it to provide the “boots on the ground” that some politicians want President Barack Obama to put into the region against the Islamic State group?

Neither Carter nor Obama seems able to provide a good reason for sending more Americans into harm’s way. Enough is enough — in blood and resources — to attempt to take back a town in Iraq that the United States fought for once already.