Quote Originally Posted by Bill Moore View Post
In simple terms it is a failure of leadership. We saw the same thing during Desert Storm and OIF 1 when they hit their breaking point. I had lunch with an Iraqi LT shortly after we secured our area in 2003, and I asked him through my terp why he didn't fire on us. He was very frank, he said he would fight for his country, but not a chair (implying Saddam). I suspect we're seeing the same now, why would they want to fight for Maliki? The senior Iraqi officers appointed by Maliki must be buffoons and completely non-inspirational. Leadership is decisive at the tactical level, and if they had warrior leaders they were more than capable of holding the line I suspect.

In comparison why do ISIS/ISIL fighters fight so hard?

Can troops with low morale, regardless of well armed they are in comparison, defeat highly motivated and aggressive troops? I know there are a lot of variables and no simple answer, but I think we underestimate the power of morale.
Are there any figures on the proportion of Sunni/ Shia/ Kurd within the ranks? That may play a role in the lack of motivation.

I think it is a toxic mix of army recruitment amounting to a jobs program, senior command turning tail, apathy or even lack of faith in the de jure government in Baghdad, and a lack of an national identity overriding tribal and/or religious identity.

Speaking of the tactical level, I am reminded of what de Atkine wrote about Arab armies.
http://www.unc.edu/depts/diplomat/AD...ne_arabs1.html