Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
U.S. troops in Iraq have no American air defense protection from Iran, but Saudi Arabia does
https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/u-s-troops-iraq-have-no-american-air-defense-protection-ncna1116746
The lack of Patriot missile batteries at the base attacked by Iran shows how little forethought the U.S. put into the consequences of killing Soleimani.
Jan. 16, 2020, 4:30 AM EST
By Sébastien Roblin
Since 2003, the United States has spent billions of dollars developing a spectrum of defensive weapons to stop powerful ballistic missiles from striking U.S. bases and positions. But on Jan. 8, none of those defenses were present when volleys of Iranian ballistic missiles came plunging down on an Iraqi air base that housed U.S. service members.
The attack on Ain al-Asad air base was a predictable response by Iran to the U.S. drone strike that killed Iranian Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani days earlier. But the roughly 1,500 U.S. military personnel at the base could only pray that none of the nearly 4-ton missiles landed nearby.
The earthshaking attack highlights how little forethought went into the consequences of killing Soleimani, and how that recklessness might easily have cost the lives of U.S. military personnel. At the very least, the Defense Department ought to have extended to its forces in Iraq the same protection it has provided Saudi Arabia — by covering them with advanced Patriot missile defenses.
Indeed, U.S troops in Iraq should have received the same consideration the moment the Trump administration committed to killing Soleimani and provoking Iran. It already had evidence that Iran was willing to use the weapons to strike foreign targets. And U.S. personnel in Iraq had already been frequent targets of smaller rocket attacks — including one just a week earlier, when Iran orchestrated the storming of the U.S. Embassy compound in Baghdad.
</snip>
The lack of Patriot missile batteries at the base attacked by Iran shows how little forethought the U.S. put into the consequences of killing Soleimani.
Jan. 16, 2020, 4:30 AM EST
By Sébastien Roblin
Since 2003, the United States has spent billions of dollars developing a spectrum of defensive weapons to stop powerful ballistic missiles from striking U.S. bases and positions. But on Jan. 8, none of those defenses were present when volleys of Iranian ballistic missiles came plunging down on an Iraqi air base that housed U.S. service members.
The attack on Ain al-Asad air base was a predictable response by Iran to the U.S. drone strike that killed Iranian Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani days earlier. But the roughly 1,500 U.S. military personnel at the base could only pray that none of the nearly 4-ton missiles landed nearby.
The earthshaking attack highlights how little forethought went into the consequences of killing Soleimani, and how that recklessness might easily have cost the lives of U.S. military personnel. At the very least, the Defense Department ought to have extended to its forces in Iraq the same protection it has provided Saudi Arabia — by covering them with advanced Patriot missile defenses.
Indeed, U.S troops in Iraq should have received the same consideration the moment the Trump administration committed to killing Soleimani and provoking Iran. It already had evidence that Iran was willing to use the weapons to strike foreign targets. And U.S. personnel in Iraq had already been frequent targets of smaller rocket attacks — including one just a week earlier, when Iran orchestrated the storming of the U.S. Embassy compound in Baghdad.
</snip>
This is a great question - glad it's being asked!
