Jihadists Seize Iraq's Nineveh Province!

[EmperorNapoleon]

I agree without strong boots on the ground, airstrikes with jets and drones won’t do much.

This was inevitable the day we ran away from Iraq like we did.

Al-Qaida-inspired militants seize Iraqi city of Tikrit, pushing deeper into Sunni areas: apne.ws/1xLnUQw

I think this was inevitable from day 1 of the invasion. Say what you will about his methods, but Saddam Hussein was the only thing keeping Iraq from total chaos and we opened the floodgates when we toppled his regime.

 

[SuperLuigi]

I think this was inevitable from day 1 of the invasion. Say what you will about his methods, but Saddam Hussein was the only thing keeping Iraq from total chaos and we opened the floodgates when we toppled his regime.

I don’t see how anyone might solidly argue against that point.

I’ve heard that Saddam had people meet with al quedia, but in the end ruled out he couldn’t trust them.

**Airstrikes aren’t going to matter **if the behavior of Iraq’s military is any indication

It’s nice to hear that from a left leaning POV.

 

[gilliam]

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[7_Sorrows]

I think this was inevitable from day 1 of the invasion. Say what you will about his methods, but Saddam Hussein was the only thing keeping Iraq from total chaos and we opened the floodgates when we toppled his regime.

That is what I am wondering. I know Saddam was a brutal dictator but maybe that is the only way he could prevent chaos.

On the other hand once Saddam was gone I don’t think his sons could have held the country together.

 

[gilliam]

I think this was inevitable from day 1 of the invasion. Say what you will about his methods, but Saddam Hussein was the only thing keeping Iraq from total chaos and we opened the floodgates when we toppled his regime.

Before the Gulf war or after? Remember that guy was invading other countries on his whim. And would have invaded Saudi Arabia if we hadn’t stopped him.

Continuous mass murder will suppress people pretty effectively (look at North Korea, Nazi Germany, Mao’s China, etc.) However, I don’t see any civilized person justifying what Saddam did to the people of Iraq.

So we stepped in.

We also stepped into Korea and the difference is WE STAYED; we didn’t run away.

When you run away from bullies, and let them beat up those who can’t defend themselves you get what you have in Iraq.

By the way, this is one reason why Libertarianism and isolationism is unchristian.

 

[gilliam]

Audio recording purportedly from Islamic State of Iraq and Syria promises more fighting in more Iraqi cities. cnn.it/1nwIQFG

 

[7_Sorrows]

Good points Gilliam in your post #44.

(It was too long to quote on my smart phone.)

 

[EmperorNapoleon]

I don’t see how anyone might solidly argue against that point.
I’ve heard that Saddam had people meet with al quedia, but in the end ruled out he couldn’t trust them.

The interesting thing is that Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden hated each other. Saddam ran a secular State and had no toleration for Wahabism. The punishment for involvement in such a movement was execution. He addressed allegations of cooperation and material support during an interrogation. His response? “He specified that if he wanted to cooperate with the enemies of the U.S., he would have allied with North Korea or China.”

That is what I am wondering. I know Saddam was a brutal dictator but maybe that is the only way he could prevent chaos. On the other hand once Saddam was gone I don’t think his sons could have held the country together.

Good point. Who knows, maybe one would bump the other off. Either way, anyone suspected of being a member of a group like ISIS would have been disappeared.

Before the Gulf war or after? Remember that guy was invading other countries on his whim. And would have invaded Saudi Arabia if we hadn’t stopped him.

Saddam Hussein wished to personally consult the United States before engaging in any conflict because he did not want to risk a direct confrontation with the U.S. He met with Ambassador April Glaspie and she looked him square in the face and indicated that the United States didn’t care if he invaded Kuwait or not. Its quite clear that the Gulf War probably wouldn’t have happened if it weren’t for that diplomatic blunder.

Continuous mass murder will suppress people pretty effectively (look at North Korea, Nazi Germany, Mao’s China, etc.) However, I don’t see any civilized person justifying what Saddam did to the people of Iraq. So we stepped in.

I didn’t put any stock in that line of reasoning then and I don’t today. In my view, its not possible to justify a war over a “genocide” committed decades prior while almost completely ignoring hundreds of thousands of people being butchered in Darfur.

We also stepped into Korea and the difference is WE STAYED; we didn’t run away.

The difference is that the South Koreans were and are willing to fight to defend their democratic way of life.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Baghdad is next…

“This is not a terrorism problem anymore,” says Jessica Lewis, an expert on ISIS at the Institute for the Study of War, a Washington think tank. “This is an army on the move in Iraq and Syria, and they are taking terrain.”

And the remainder of the weapons are there. Of course they are better soldiers now, they been out there for years fighting. And they are gaining better equipment.

google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&sqi=2&ved=0CB8QqQIwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Ftime.com%2F2859454%2Firaq-tikrit-isis-baghdad-mosul%2F&ei=AjSZU9iGL5C_sQTlyILwAg&usg=AFQjCNEUQgW1XKQTaSWz4iDMQIq73P8Mug

google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&sqi=2&ved=0CCEQqQIwAQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB10001424052702303642704579617882507905194.html&ei=AjSZU9iGL5C_sQTlyILwAg&usg=AFQjCNHnlro58O64dbRUlXIWj1iDzmp98g

The United States has provided a $14 billion foreign military aid package to Iraq that includes F-16 fighter jets, Apache attack helicopters and M-16 rifles. It has rushed hundreds of Hellfire missiles as well as ScanEagle reconnaissance drones.

A second round of counterterrorism training between American Special Operations commandos and Iraqi troops started in Jordan this week. At least two F-16s are set to arrive in Iraq by September, and six Apaches will be leased for training later this year, Iraqi and Pentagon officials said.

But some former generals who served in Iraq said a greater effort was needed.

google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CB8QqQIwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2014%2F06%2F12%2Fworld%2Fmiddleeast%2Firaq-asked-us-for-airstrikes-on-militants-officials-say.html&ei=hTaZU8TsK8KQyASjnIDoAw&usg=AFQjCNEozZadn61u64PmnlxIxCrdnT5kFQ

 

[Coatimundi]

The Iraqi government has been requesting US airstrikes for the past few months

“Iraqi officials at the highest level said they had requested manned and unmanned U.S. airstrikes this year against ISIS camps in the Jazira desert,” said Kenneth M. Pollack, a former C.I.A. analyst and National Security Council official, who is a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and who visited Baghdad in early March. ISIS is the acronym for the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, as the militant group is known.

As the Sunni insurgents have grown in strength those requests have persisted. In a May 11 meeting with American diplomats and Gen. Lloyd J. Austin III, the head of the Central Command, which oversees American military operations in the Middle East, Mr. Maliki said he would like the United States to provide Iraq with the ability to operate drones. But if the United States was not willing to do that, Mr. Maliki indicated he was prepared to allow the United States to carry out strikes using warplanes or drones.

In a May 16 phone call with Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., Mr. Maliki again suggested that the United States consider using American air power. A written request repeating that point was submitted soon afterward, officials said.
nytimes.com/2014/06/12/world/middleeast/iraq-asked-us-for-airstrikes-on-militants-officials-say.html?_r=1

 

[Holly3278]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The White House signaled on Wednesday that it was looking to strengthen Iraqi forces to help them deal with an insurgency rather than to meet what one U.S. official said were past Iraqi requests for U.S. air strikes.

news.yahoo.com/u-focus-boosting-iraqi-forces-not-air-strikes-034954846.html

Would United States military intervention in another nation’s conflict be considered an unjust war?

 

[Ridgerunner]

Ridgerunner, do you think if saddam had been left in power iraq would be where it is today or do you think he needed to be captured?

So you think iran is behind all the troubles wanting to create a caliphateonce again? Correct me if I have it wrong.

Saddam Hussein was responsible for about a million deaths. He invaded two countries. He violated the truce after “Round 1”. He was developing WMD and obviously would use them. His limitations were only those he, himself, chose. His sons were even worse people.

There are two competing forces in the Middle East now that Obama made the decision there would be no third force to restrain their ambitions. One is Iran, whose ambitions are to rule at least from Afghanistan to the Mediterranean. The other(s) are the various Sunni jihadi groups who want a new Sunni “Caliphate” (empire) covering all the Middle East, North Africa and at least Spain, if not all of Europe. Both are savage killers and intolerant of Christianity. Both intend to use the wealth and power of empire to spread their particular brands of Islam worldwide, and by force if necessary.

Obama either didn’t understand that or, understanding it, either didn’t care or thought it was a good thing.

 

[Seamus_L]

And now the Kurds have seized Kirkuk bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-27809051 Amazing how quickly all this has been happening.

 

[gilliam]

And now the Kurds have seized Kirkuk bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-27809051 Amazing how quickly all this has been happening.

Iraqi army is collapsing.

An attack on Bagdad is imminent.

 

[Coatimundi]

Iraqi army is collapsing.

An attack on Bagdad is imminent.

Last night, I read reports that the Iraqi army held the line at Samarra. Aided by Iraqi airstrikes, they were able to repulse the ISIS-led force. However, I just saw a claim that ISIS was trying to storm the city. Any news on what is happening?

BBC News says that the emergency session of parliament had to be cancelled because only 128 of the 325 members showed up. The Prime Minister had called parliament together so they could approve an official state of emergency, which would have given the PM extraordinary powers. I would be interested in learning whether the Sunni lawmakers were deliberately not attending. There has been talk of a Sunni-Shiite civil war breaking out.

 

[Coatimundi]

Not a good situation, at all.

Two helicopters, also seized by the militants, flew overhead, witnesses said, apparently the first time the militant group has obtained aircraft in years of waging insurgency on both sides of the Iraqi-Syrian frontier.

Further south, the fighters extended their lightning advance to towns only about an hour’s drive from the capital Baghdad, where Shi’ite militia are mobilising for a potential replay of the ethnic and sectarian bloodbath of 2006-2007.

Trucks carrying Shi’ite volunteers in uniform rumbled towards the front lines to defend the capital.
reuters.com/article/2014/06/12/us-iraq-violence-idUSKBN0EN0RV20140612

The involvement of Shia militias could transform the fight along Sunni-Shiite lines (which, of course, is what ISIS wants.)

 

[Coatimundi]

Here is a little bit on the situation in Samarra:

In Samarra on Thursday, witnesses said, militants who had been reinforced overnight by three columns of fighters in scores of vehicles, were deployed in positions three miles east and north of the city. Other insurgents had pressed south to take the town of Dhuluiyah, closer to Baghdad, while two predominantly Shiite towns in the region, Balad and Dujail, remained in Shiite hands as forward bases for attempts to halt the insurgents.

At the same time, in what seemed to have the makings of a perilous standoff, battle-hardened Assaib and Kataibe Shiite militias that once fought the Americans had reached Samarra to reinforce pro-government forces there. Government troops who abandoned their posts further north had been ordered to report to the Taji military base, just north of Baghdad to regroup, officials said.
nytimes.com/2014/06/13/world/middleeast/iraq.html?hp

Some readers may remember that a bombing, eight years ago, of a major Shiite shrine in Samarra ignited Sunni-Shiite fighting which bordered on civil war

 

[gilliam]

The involvement of Shia militias could transform the fight along Sunni-Shiite lines (which, of course, is what ISIS wants.)

Will be interesting to see Iran & Saudi Arabia’s reactions. This could blow up to be a regional war soon.

Some of the border between Syria and Iraq is now gone.

On a side note: what would be different if Iran had nukes?

 

[Seamus_L]

I think there is the possibility that the ISIL forces may become seriously over extended. Baghdad, with it’s large Shia population will offer much stiffer resistance, if it ends up being attacked at all. This is not a particularly large force that wreaking havoc in Iraq at the moment.

 

[gilliam]

Iraq’s appeals for a military help from the US have been rejected by the White House, which is “reluctant to open a new chapter in a conflict that President Obama has insisted was over when the US withdrew the last of its forces from Iraq in 2011”, The New York Times reports.

"For those asking who are you? We are soldiers of Islam and took on our responsiblity to bring back glory of the Islamic Caliphate.
ibtimes.co.uk/iraq-isis-crisis-medieval-sharia-law-imposed-millions-nineveh-province-1452401

Note they don’t like Shia: The document added that Isis wish to destroy all shrines and graves, in reference to Shia shrines in towns such as Samarra where fighting is continuing.