ISIS In Iraq Have Won? Barack Obama Sends Military Advisers, But Vows No U.S. Troops In Iraq War

Have the ISIS in Iraq won already? The fighting still rages but some people like former CIA director Michael Hayden are claiming that the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria may have already ended Iraq as we know it.

In a related report by The Inquisitr, the fact that President Obama allowed ISIS in Iraq due to inaction has some wounded U.S. veterans criticizing the White House for wasting their sacrifice, especially since Iran's troops seem to be the only hope. The situation is so bad that some of our reporters believe that Iraq could be the flashpoint for starting World War 3 since it could lead to the rise of Muslim extremist attempting to reestablish the caliphate in the Middle East and beyond. Interestingly enough, even Glenn Beck is now saying that the original Iraq war should never have happened:

"We went into Iraq three years ago to prevent World War III, as nuts as this might sound, to prevent the evil Iranian ideology from spreading across the region.... I know that searching for weapons of mass destruction was a side benefit of going into Iraq. The real reason was to plant the seeds of democracy and change the face of the Middle East."
But if the ISIS in Iraq have successfully toppled the official Iraqi government then they, and other groups that support their cause, could use the win as a launch pad for further incursions into other countries. This potential reality has retired General Hayden saying the ISIS in Iraq have essentially won although he believes the country will be split up into multiple factions:
"The state of Iraq as we know it is gone, and it's not going to be reconstituted. It's certainly not going to be reconstituted by [Prime Minister] Nouri al-Maliki.... We've got three successor states there now. As much as we might look for opportunities to keep Iraq together, we need to be prepared for the reality that it's not going to stay together.... We should snuggle up comfortable with the Kurds in Kurdistan, who have always been pro-American and actually have a functioning society and state right now. We should give help to the Maliki government, sufficient to settle the current conflict so it just doesn't turn into a humanitarian disaster. For example, there's fighting around Beiji right now, the oil refinery north of Baghdad. Baghdad needs that for that part of the country to survive, and so we've got to settle the lines of this conflict in a way that Nouri al-Maliki's surviving state, which I'll call Shiastan, has Beiji within it. Then we've got Sunnistan, and that's the state under the control of ISIS right now, and frankly, we've got to treat that as if it were a safe haven for terrorists and begin to think about it the way we had thought about Waziristan for the last decade-plus. That's a tough message, and I'm afraid that's where we are."
The internet has also been flooded by photos and videos showing the brutality that ISIS is capable of. They've executed thousands of Iraq's security personnel, even those who have surrendered during battles. In addition to images of the mass executions, they even once used Twitter to show off how they wanted to use the head of a beheaded Iraqi leader as a soccer ball in the World Cup.

Now President Obama did put some U.S. troops in Iraq, but this move was limited to 275 soldiers who are providing security and support for the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad. In addition, it was announced recently that 300 military advisers would join them but, in general, Barack Obama has committed to not allowing the U.S. military to intervene with the fighting by the ISIS in Iraq:

"We do not have the ability to simply solve this problem by sending in tens of thousands of troops and committing the kinds of blood and treasure that has already been expended in Iraq. Ultimately, this is something that is going to have to be solved by Iraqis."
Do you think President Barack Obama should allow the ISIS in Iraq to win the country by not putting U.S. troops in Iraq?