Iraq and it's Al-Queda problem

[GostHacked]

Big guy suggested civil war and it doesn't sound like that at the moment. In a civil war ISIS would be seeing resistance and wouldn't be moving so swiftly and easily. Would you not agree?

If there was no previous intervention from the west, I would see this as a civil war. This is more of a plan to pit Muslim against Muslim. Sunni against Shiite. If they are busy fighting each other, they won't be fighting the west. But once they realize that they were played, we are going to see retaliation in the form of more terror attacks.

If ISIS is receiving support from the local people, which I would agree they must be, then where's the civil war?

Where is it in Syria? Government forces fighting terror groups partially funded and trained by the west. Civil war or proxy war?

That could develop in the future when it's the Kurds' turn. And without US support it's not going to be much of a civil war in my opinion. I'm even wondering if the Kurds will attempt to stand up against the rest of Iraq, or will they just turn tail?

One report I heard was that the Kurds managed to take over a town in the north. Or take back what they had years ago. Not exactly sure here. And the Kurds could not turn tail as they have been seeing a lot of resistance from Turkey. Turkey has made some attacks on the Kurds over the last year.

One interesting thing is that Iran is wanting to help out in Iraq. But that is more to do with the faction of Islam they follow. Shiite against Sunni.

[monty16]

I can’t speak for Big Guy, but I would suggest the “civil war” will begin once the Shia population comes into direct conflict with the Sunni/ISIS fighters…..then, devoid of outside intervention, I suspect the conflict will devolve along the same lines as that in Syria.

Maybe Big Guy will comment on that possibility? I just don't think it's there because it was practically non-existant under Saddam. However, it's interesting to speculate that the US will try to prop up the Shiites by bombing ISIS. It's certainly not in their plans at the moment though. About all they are saying is that they want to prevent American heads from getting lopped off.

[Derek 2.0]

I would be interested in your thoughts on it. You are the first person I have encountered so far that read that book. To me, it played out exactly how things are today. More of a prediction really.

In my opinion his conclusions are largely correct, but the concept of the United States being the world’s policeman/umpire are hardly new.

[monty16]

you've completely screwed up the quoting in that post #201. Why not eliminate it or fix it. I don't want to be credited with somebody else's words.

Edited June 15, 2014 by monty16

[Derek 2.0]

Maybe Big Guy will comment on that possibility? I just don't think it's there because it was practically non-existant under Saddam. However, it's interesting to speculate that the US will try to prop up the Shiites by bombing ISIS. It's certainly not in their plans at the moment though. About all they are saying is that they want to prevent American heads from getting lopped off.

It was present under Saddam……The Iraqi Republican Guard were namely Sunni loyalists and kept both the Shia and Kurd populations inline through use of force.

As to any intervention by the Americans, I think they have no choice, fore if they don’t, the Iraqi Shia lead government will turn to Iran for support, which will then force ISIS to seek (further?) aide from Saudi Arabia……Once/if that happens, unlike Syria, I don’t see how this can remain a proxy war.

[GostHacked]

Why don't you give us a nutshell analysis and save us the trouble? It's better than getting into something blind and just hearing more US propaganda and wishful thinking.

That's just the thing. This book and the content is very macro. It takes time to explain the nutshell before you can even get into the contents. Barnett also has to explain about 100 years of history before he can explain the current situation as he sees it.

This is about as condensed as it can get

Fwiw, we all know how Wesley Clarke blew the whistle on US plans to run roughshod over Syria before doing Iran.

He did, and people would not take him seriously.

We all should have known that the US intended on supporting any opposition to Assad's government so that they could eventually see a sympathetic US government installed in Syria. Thereby isolating Iran. It's all gone awry and it's too after the fact to waste time on now.

After Iraq and Afghanistan were invaded, it was not hard to see that Iran was in the sights as well.

The plan in Syria is postponed, I would not say abandoned. The US cannot go toe to toe with Syria because Russia will get involved. So again, turns into another proxy war most likely perpetuating the Sunni/Shiite hatred towards one another. Kind of the same reason the US is not making that much of a stink about Ukraine, but that is missing the contextual infighting among muslims.

[GostHacked]

you've completely screwed up the quoting in that post #201. Why not eliminate it or fix it. I don't want to be credited with somebody else's words.

FFS relax. One can easily go back and read your original post for correction. I usually catch these errors right away. Today my care factor in that specific area is a little low.

[Shady]

I find the situation is kind of heartbreaking, especially for the Iraqis.

Iraqi soldier who fought with Americans says decision to flee left him feeling ashamed

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2014/06/14/230400/iraqi-soldier-who-fought-with.html?sp=/99/100/&ihp=1

[Big Guy]

We call this an Iraq or Iran or Syria or whatever problem. I believe this is just an inevitable continuing Sunni/Shia conflict.

I am going to risk getting long winded here;

Many years ago, the was a guy named Saddam in Iraq who took power by force. He was Sunni and the Sunni were a minority in the place we call Iraq. A neighbour of Iraq was a place we call Iran. Iran was run by the Shiites.

In Iraq, Saddam kept the Shia out of his government and waged periodic wars with Iran. The West had alienated Iran after a revolution so it backed Saddam with weapons and money. These periodic wars kept both countries occupied and maintained a semblance of stability to the region. The West decided for whatever reason (oil or chemical weapons or whatever) to attack Saddam. It used the pretense that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction – the USA had supplied them so it should know, shouldn't they?

So the USA got Saddam killed and his Sunni folks out of power. It set up a puppet government which promised to create a Shia/Sunni cooperative government and said “adios and best wishes”.

Meanwhile, next door in Syria, which is predominantly (70%) a Sunni area with the Shia Assad was experiencing a revolution. Insurgents were trying to topple the Assad dictatorship and the West who had been propping up Assad decided that it was time for him to go. We decided to support the insurgents who were now the good guys. Pressure was being put on the West to supply arms to the revolutionaries and it looked like we would send a few.

But then OPPS! We looked at the other folks on our side going after Assad and saw some guys in black who were called ISIS. ISIS were so radical that even Al Qaeda wanted no part of them. We decided that giving these guys weapons and support ain't gonna work. Meanwhile, ISIS was a fanatical Sunni organization and looking to take Assad out (just like the West). We were now potentially getting into bed with these fanatics – so we passed on the offer.

Now going back to Iraq. The Western puppet President decided that his Shia tribe was more important than this thing the West called Iraq and tossed out most of the Sunni in government and consequently really pi$$ing off all those Sunni folks in Northern Iraq. Remember ISIS was still in a battle in Syria and looked over at the ripe pickings in Iraq. A few thousand Sunni ISIS fighters entered Iraq to cheering and open arms from the pi$$ed off Sunni and began a lightening push towards Baghdad, picking up support from the locals.

So now we had the USA backing the Shia puppet government in Iraq but had already said adios! The Shia government of Iran was also backing the Shia puppet government of Iraq. In fact, Iran promised to send ground troops to help those Shia from those radical ISIS Sunni marching towards Baghdad.

Except for the Kurds which I believe are looking after their own, Northern Iraq is mainly Sunni and comfortable with ISIS. Southern Iraqis are mostly Shia and has no use for these insurgents. Baghdad is mainly Shia but stands on the dividing line and the first major battle of this civil war will start here.

This weekend, the Republicans in the USA (and some Democrats) were considering sending air strikes into Iraq against ISIS. Iran is ready to send ground troops into Iraq against ISIS.

SO – ARE YOU READY FOR THIS – It is very possible that the USA will be sending in air support for a ground assault against Sunni ISIS by Shia Iran into Iraq.

Maybe we should have thought twice before getting involved in that part of the world.

Edited June 15, 2014 by Big Guy

[Big Guy]

I was watching this mornings news. It appears that ISIS had gained strength and is regrouping before going after Baghdad. The ISIS fighters have been reinforced with local volunteers, have captured hundreds of armaments (no tanks so far), thousands of anti-aircraft missals (ironic - US planes will be dodging their own missals if they bomb) and hundreds of $millions in American cash. The finger pointing is starting in Washington.

I just hope that Harper is not tempted but keeps our troops out of that fiasco.

[Derek 2.0]

This weekend, the Republicans in the USA (and some Democrats) were considering sending air strikes into Iraq against ISIS. Iran is ready to send ground troops into Iraq against ISIS.

SO – ARE YOU READY FORE THIS – It is very possible that the USA will be sending in air support for a ground assault against Sunni ISIS by Shia Iran into Iraq.

Maybe we should have thought twice before getting involved in that part of the world.

That’s a very real possibility…….But with the geopolitical realities of the world as they are, the West has no choice but intervention……

To further expand upon on your meme though, a potential conflict could see the Americans and Iran supporting the Iraqi Government against Saudi supported ISIS forces.

[Derek 2.0]

I just hope that Harper is not tempted but keeps our troops out of that fiasco.

Outside of “moral” support, with the current state of our Armed Forces, Canada would have very little to offer in such a conflict.

[Shady]

Outside of “moral” support, with the current state of our Armed Forces, Canada would have very little to offer in such a conflict.

Exactly. Even American troops won't be involved in it. It's going to be purely airstrikes and drone strikes to soften up this newish terrorist group that spawned in Syria.

[monty16]

That’s a very real possibility…….But with the geopolitical realities of the world as they are, the West has no choice but intervention……

To further expand upon on your meme though, a potential conflict could see the Americans and Iran supporting the Iraqi Government against Saudi supported ISIS forces.

The West does have another choice. It's entirely possible that the West can walk away from it all. Obama knows, as well as Ron Paul knows, that it was never about a fight against terrorism. They both know that the US created the problem right from the beginning. 9/11 was revenge! So it's part my prediction and part wishful thinking that this can end in the same way the Vietnam war ended. Nothing negative for the US came out of that one other than a loss of face.

And if we believe the US then the urgency to control ME oil is no longer a factor either.

The way to end terrorism is for the US to stop terrorizing them.

The Israeli/Zionist factor is a sticking point but the US can surely come to understand eventually that supporting that evil apartheid regime is going to cost the US. It was surely a big part of the revenge attack on 9/11. It's no longer worth supporting.

It's very encouraging to see that the US is pretty much undecided on whether or not to interfere by propping up Maliki.

We won't have to wait long in order to see if the US decides to drag it's feet and not act. We already know that more troops back into Iraq is out. And we're told that bombing somebody, whoever that is, is not going to do the job against ISIS.

[monty16]

http://rt.com/news/166068-us-uk-iraq-joint-force/

Not too much argument over this analysis right kids?

What's going to be interesting is seeing what the US will do if it does start bombing ISIS and they shoot down a few US planes with their new toys!

If the US reads this right they will begin to understand that they are just getting themselves deeper into the sh-t if they decide to prop up Maliki. LOL

Almost sounds like Russia is hoping they do!

[Argus]

I can’t speak for Big Guy, but I would suggest the “civil war” will begin once the Shia population comes into direct conflict with the Sunni/ISIS fighters…..then, devoid of outside intervention, I suspect the conflict will devolve along the same lines as that in Syria.

Nope. The Shiites greatly outnumber the Sunnis, and have massive aid available right next door in Iran, their fellow Shiites. many suggest the Revolutionary Guards are already in Iraq.

[Argus]

That’s a very real possibility…….But with the geopolitical realities of the world as they are, the West has no choice but intervention……

Nonsense. There are, at best 5-6k insurgents. The Iraqi army has 500,000 men, there are large and growing Shiite militias, and the Iranians right next door. There is no need for western intervention.

[monty16]

Nonsense. There are, at best 5-6k insurgents. The Iraqi army has 500,000 men, there are large and growing Shiite militias, and the Iranians right next door. There is no need for western intervention.

Gotta love that one! No need for US intervention! Playing it safe and predicting that the US won't need to intervene, just in case it doesn't. Not because the US obviously doesn't know 'how' to intervene now.

In any case, everybody except US apologists and Americans should be happy because this can't turn out to be a bad thing!

[monty16]

this is a good one!

http://rt.com/op-edge/165876-maliki-iraq-baath-army/

Many fighters are coming together to fight against Maliki's government. And how many of the Baghdad defenders will just walk away from it all?

[Derek 2.0]

Nope. The Shiites greatly outnumber the Sunnis, and have massive aid available right next door in Iran, their fellow Shiites. many suggest the Revolutionary Guards are already in Iraq.

Indeed......So how did Saddam ever control Iraq?

[Derek 2.0]

Nonsense. There are, at best 5-6k insurgents. The Iraqi army has 500,000 men, there are large and growing Shiite militias, and the Iranians right next door. There is no need for western intervention.

And what will happen if Iran openly involves itself in Iraq.......You don't think Saudi Arabia and the rest of the Gulf States will mind?

[eyeball]

Maybe we should have thought twice before getting involved in that part of the world.

Assuming any thought at all has gone into it at all.

So The Great Satan and Iran will be allies in this dog's breakfast of BFF's? Imagine some Islamic religion siding with the Pope in a war of Christian vs Christian.

What's an atheist to do but stock up on popcorn? Keep their heads down if nothing else.

[bush_cheney2004]

So The Great Satan and Iran will be allies in this dog's breakfast of BFF's? Imagine some Islamic religion siding with the Pope in a war of

Being allies with Joseph Stalin was also welcomed when the royal empire was going belly up.

[On Guard for Thee]

Exactly. Even American troops won't be involved in it. It's going to be purely airstrikes and drone strikes to soften up this newish terrorist group that spawned in Syria.

ISIS was spawned in Iraq.

[monty16]

Syria's army is pounding ISIS forces as we speak. Should the US supply Assad with more chem/bio weapons if Assad only uses them on ISIS.

If anybody wants to stay up to date on what's really going on then just check out RT news. The US still isn't talking about it because they're all confused. Really, it's just great entertainment for Russia!

Oh, and anyone who thinks the Ukraine situation has cooled off, isn't paying attention. The Kiev gov is pushing Russia to the brink with violence and killing of people who are loyal to Russia.