I just think it is weird that this thread is confusing a stupid decision by marine corps management, if it even happened, with a problem with America.
What you are hinting are all symptoms of the fact that America and its leadership is disconnected from the military. You called this a pussified nation But all the things you describe are problems with the military and the political leadership in Washington.
And as for Iraq and Afghanistan goes, i understand there is a lot of anger and a desire to not have had it all been a waste but frankly the whole last 12 years in those 2 countries have been a waste.
Yes we won many battles and fought bravely but in the end we did not win a positive strategic outcome. the problem is that a positive strategic outcome in those countries was never possible to begin with. You don't have to be a history major to see this in plain light.
By Any measurement both campaigns Have failed.
"F their hearts and minds" one Marine said in a documentary I watched recently. The Marine had just had a local villager who had met them earlier shoot at them later in the day. It isn't uncommon at all to have the locals lie to our troops face over tea and then attack at night.
I think people need to wake up to fact that it was a mistake to think that US troops can "fix hearts and minds" in the first place. To believe this is to believe in nation building and culture shaping. Two things that US Troops should not be used for - ever.
Yes I served in Navy, 6 years on a combat platform, deployed twice. No I don't claim to understand what the guys on the gground went throughin these two shitty wars. I do have a lot of respect for our soldiers who served and I plan to only support wars where I believe in the cause myself, where I would send my friends or family to fight. It needs to be a good cause to be worth their lives and the lives of the soldiers in the US military.
Right now the public just uses troops without deep thought and sends them off to these foreign wars. It isn't a problem for them because practically no one serves. Once you go to public college with the regular (non-military) students (if you haven't already) then you will see and meet the 20-30 somethings of "generation like" who have no f#cking clue about these ongoing wars and dont give a sh#t because there is 0 chance they will be sent to Syria or Yemen or wherever the military is sent to fight (and take casualties) next.
This subject of US foreign policy and what is happening in Iraq and Afghanistan ... I have read quite a lot about it actually. One book I'd recommend for anyone is "The Good Soldiers" also the movies Restreppo and Korrengal.
////////////////////////////////////////////////
There was a super detailed and thorough analysis of the US military's failed 2 wars done at the Atlantic.
The Tragedy of the American Military | Feb. 2015
http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2014/12/the-tragedy-of-the-american-military/383516/
Also there is plenty of reading out there for why the Iraq war failed. Specifically this excellent PBS Frontline Documentary which includes a complete timeline from Saddam to just a few months pre-ISIS.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/losing-iraq/
////////////////////////////
Acceptance that Iraq is really 3 separate countries that all hate each other would be a huge step in the right direction for US foreign policy. Instead we are trying to keep it together with foreign aid money. The ones who pay the most are the soldiers and their families. The same problems exist with the Syrian civil war and the territory held by ISIS.
Mosal is a Sunni city with between 1M to 1.5M people and it is "held by ISIS" or "aligned with ISIS" - when it fell the Iraq Army dropped their US paid for weapons and ran like cowards. That is what we were told. Despite all the funding they were not willing to die against ISIS even though they outnumbered them massively. What is also not mentioned that often is that the Sunni side of the Iraqi Army basically defected on the spot and would not fight ISIS. The Shiites ran for their lives and the Sunnis joined ISIS.
Why does this matter? Well there is a lot of talk right now that the US will try to retake Mosal using Iraqi Army troops and US Advisors (eg SPEC OPS) ... but what does that really mean?
Why is it when the US goes into a hostile city like Mosal the civilians work with the terrorists and setup roadside bombs but yet when ISIS comes into town they don't do that, instead they just support them?
The now Shiite Iraqi Army doesn't want to retake Mosal on their own because they are not willing to die to retake Mosal. It is that simple. But yet the Iraqi Army would love to have US troops come in and do the fighting and dying.
The fact that anyone (Marine or Army or whomever) would think this is a worthwhile cause is just shocking to me. The country is divided and Mosal and it's citizens are now aligned with ISIS. Retaking the city is just a waste. The city itself and its people are the ones supporting ISIS. So retaking it by force will do nothing since all of the people (over a million) will still be Sunni who support ISIS.
It is public knowledge that plans to retake Mosal by force are ongoing right now. If that happens a lot of good US soldiers may die in the process.
We have to ask ourselves: for what purpose?