U.S. backed Iraqi government? Iranian-backed Shiite government, you mean. We left a long time ago. We’re out of it except insofar as Obama might choose to help Iran. Right now, he doesn’t know what to do.The US backed Iraq government has been shutting down any access to social media such as You Tube or Google. This is the type of democracy(?) that American taxpayers have been supporting? One thousand billion dollars is a lot of money to waste.
businessinsider.com/iraq-blocks-twitter-facebook-youtube-amid-crisis-2014-6
PS. The US condemns Russia for having restrictions on the internet, but you can get You Tube and Google in Russia.
I tend not to take anything Press TV says seriously. They have been so wrong on so many things.Iranian Press TV is reporting that 1.5 million Iraqis have volunteered to fight ISIL. I think we’re going to see a major retreat by the Jihadists in the next several days. They advanced too quickly against virtually no opposition, now they will be facing a Shia army that has overwhelming odds in it’s favor.
Right. The USA can find a way to wash its hands of any responsibility for the mess it has created by invading Iraq under false pretenses.Interesting read that relates to what people have been discussing here:
Obama, McCain and Maliki
The Blame for Iraq Is Shared
THE debacle in Iraq isn’t President Obama’s fault. It’s not the Republicans’ fault. Both bear some responsibility, but, overwhelmingly, it’s the fault of the Iraqi prime minister, Nuri Kamal al-Maliki.
Some on the left suggest that President George W. Bush is at fault because he invaded Iraq in the first place. Senator John McCain argues that the White House bears such responsibility that President Obama should replace his national security team.
Let’s remember that Iraq isn’t a political prop. It’s a country whose 33 million people are on the edge of a precipice. Iraq is driven primarily by its own dynamic, and unfortunately, there are more problems in international relations than there are solutions.
The debate about who lost Iraq is an echo of the equally foolish debate in the mid-20th century about “who lost China.” China wasn’t ours to lose then, and Iraq isn’t ours to lose today.
Read the rest: nytimes.com/2014/06/15/opinion/sunday/nicholas-kristof-the-blame-for-iraq-is-shared.html
Didn’t Russia warn the USA against backing the rebels in Syria?ISIS, beheadings and the success of horrifying violence
The group overrunning Iraq wants to build a caliphate stretching from Iraq to Syria and beyond
Yep. Although the US wasn’t backing these rebels. The US was backing the secular rebels that were led by old Syrian army officers. There is speculation that had we supported them more, ISIS would not have took root in Syria.Didn’t Russia warn the USA against backing the rebels in Syria?
The Shiite militias will certainly help. They are loyal (to their militia leaders) and they are committed enough to sacrifice their lives. I am not sure that can be said of the Iraqi army.I think we’re going to see a major retreat by the Jihadists in the next several days. They advanced too quickly against virtually no opposition, now they will be facing a Shia army that has overwhelming odds in it’s favor.
Yes it is.This is a complete disaster!
All we really know is that these rivalries that have run for centuries will live until those concerned love their own countries more than they hate each other. That is a socio-religious problem which war cannot fix, unless we want to become their babysitters for the next 1000 years or so.Yep. Although the US wasn’t backing these rebels. The US was backing the secular rebels that were led by old Syrian army officers. There is speculation that had we supported them more, ISIS would not have took root in Syria.
All speculation right now, no one really knows.
Are you sure that there is not an overlap among the different rebel groups trying to oust Assad?Yep. Although the US wasn’t backing these rebels.
The reports are that ISIS has captured huge amounts of American weapons sent to Iraq. These American weapons will help ISIS to attain its objectives. Unfortunately, it appears that the Americans have not thought out the consequences of delivering unsecured weapons to areas in Iraq or Syria which could easily be overrun by rebels. Actually, this whole Iraq thing was not planned very well. When you have a country consisting of Shiites and Sunni Muslims, it only makes sense to have a certain amount of power sharing and not have all the power in the hands of one group. A whole lot of money is being wasted in Iraq and in Afghanistan. Something like a thousand billion dollars. This money could have been put to much better use in the USA. For one thing, this money could be used to pay the tuition for college for many families in the USA who cannot afford the high price of a college education today, especially if they want to attend a Catholic college.ISIS destroys 3000 year old Assyrian statues.ln.is/www.apsa2011.com/ind/5T4ia …
And, didn’t we warn Russia about backing Iran? In fact I believe they are helping build 5-more reactors, or at least mentioned this in the media as an apparent plan or progress. Why would listen to them? What your suggesting is you believe they were correct here?Didn’t Russia warn the USA against backing the rebels in Syria?
But Isis only has 2500 troops, all the rest are Sunni muslims who are not extremists. So then Isis really doesn’t have control of all these weapons? Or would you say its a fact Isis only will use these weapons and restrict the others? Also the Kurds took some of this back already?The reports are that ISIS has captured huge amounts of American weapons sent to Iraq.