Radicals advancing in Iraq. What do you think?

Post Reply New Topic

Radicals are advancing and gaining strength in Iraq. I'm guessing they will be in a direct assault on Bagdad within three months. And, eventually, the Taliban will govern Iraq. Watch for Iran and Syria to be heavy players - not direct combat, as much as logistics and clout. And, Russia and Putin will be very active in the shadows. What do you think?

What do I think?
That we should have been more heavy handed in our execution of that campaign and spent far less time in Iraq. There's just no point helping those that won't help themselves. In effect, it's turned out to be Vietnam all over again.

Syria won't be able to do anything, Assad has his hands full. Iran is already sending in Revolutionary Guard troops to back up the Iraqi Maliki Army and will mobilize its Shia militias within Iraq as well. If ISIS is going to strike Baghdad then they'll probably do it sooner than later before they can formulate a defense. They'll take control of the Sunni areas of Baghdad and besiege the rest of the city from there, they have military grade weapons like attack helicopters and SAMs. They stole a ton of uniforms so I wouldn't be surprised if you see them try to infiltrate Iraqi military bases.

To add to what I said earlier.
This pretty much sums up the situation in Iraq.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fixiURogqDw[/youtube]

Perfect video. Like the ARVN of South Viet Nam, the Iraqis are unwilling to put forth the effort to free their nation. Really, their suffering and their future suffering is the result of their own choices. We spent a lot of money and lost a lot of people to put Iraq in a position to be part of the modern world. I can see taking action to the level of our own interest, but nothing beyond that.

Right. Why kill 250 000 Iraqis when you can kill half a million? Go big or go home, huh?

i would have had a lot more respect for the American government if they'd just been honest from day one about the reason for going in rather than changing their story half way through when they didnt find the WMD's they 'knew' were there.

Last edited by thomas81 on 12 Jun 2014, 4:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Was always a lot cause, should have never been there in the first place. As I mentioned in another thread, they are human sewage. The only thing that was keeping this from happening before was a militant dictator. We have always know that Sadams iron fisted rule was the only thing keeping the entire place from melting down. Screw them, this is the lesson from that stupid invasion. We cant control these idiots. The world was better off with Sadam in power. You could generally extend that same philosophy to Gaddafi as well.

It appears you miss the point and it's obviously intentional.

In and of itself, I think you are right about Syria. But, I'm guessing Syria will be a proxy and pass-thru for Russia and Putin. Russia will play all ends toward the middle. Putin is a friend to all and an enemy to all.

The point is-

- NATO had no business being in Iraq in the first place
- Its obvious to anyone with a brain that the entire operation was at the behest of the oil corporations
- The WMD's were a fabrication designed to whip the western public into a false frenzy
( a lie was invented that Iraq had missiles capable of hitting London)
- That it was the west who propped Saddam in the first place.

The entire rotten story is an excercise in lies, greed, corruption, murder and hypocrisy from start to finish and its Uncle Sam's hands that are dripping in the blood of hundreds of thousands of innocent people.

Small correction but Iraq wasn't a NATO operation, it was a 'coalition of the willing led by the US and UK with other countries involves like Poland, Australia, South Korea, Georgia, etc. Afghanistan is NATO.

T'wasnt a NATO operation.

Perhaps if defense intelligence funding under the Clinton administration hand't been cut the way it was, we would have had better intel about whether or not Iraq actually had WMD's at that time. With diminished intelligence gathering capabilities, an invasion was the only option. Now, Imagine if they did have WMD's and used them on one of their neighbors. We'd be hearing the left screech for decades about how we could have intervened and prevented it. We acted on the information we had at the time. My only regret is that we spent too much time, lives, and money trying to save them from themselves when it was a lost cause from the get-go.

Yes, during the Iran-Iraq war Iraq under Saddam was the lesser evil and therefor supported.

Other countries were in that coalition, too, ya know.

How do you know?

/\ Does this look staged to you?

I know a bunch of military people who have served over there. Initially, they thought they were doing a lot of good and would get lots of appreciation. They constantly talked about the poverty and terrible humanitarian issues. However, most became disillusioned by the lack of cooperation by the Iraqis and a sense that they were never wanted. In particular, many IEDs are planted by people working out in the open with lots of Iraqis watching, but our troops are given no warning. So, they are sick and tired of the Middle East. I knew guys who were in the original action, then went back to finish the job. Instead, they realized Iraq is not ready or willing to be part of the modern world. I feel for those folks. They go far away from home, fight, and the people they fight for don't care.

What does a video that's not staged look like?

What can one video possibly tell us about the entire situation, anyway?

Last edited by Stannis on 13 Jun 2014, 9:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.