42 posts in this topic

Posted

Iran is coming to the aid of its historic nemesis, sending elite fighters to Iraq in the wake of a Sunni insurgency that has claimed two key northern cities and now threatens Baghdad, Fox News has learned.
 
Some 150 fighters from the Revolutionary Guards elite Quds force have already been dispatched by Tehran, and the division's powerful commander, Qassem Suleimani, met with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki Thursday and pledged to send two notorious Iranian brigades to aid in the defense of Baghdad. That could amount to as many as 10,000 soldiers sent to fight the Sunni group known as Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIS).
 
Maliki is believed to be considering the offer, especially in light of reported decisions by the U.S. to reject his request for American airstrikes against the Al Qaeda-affiliated militants who have recently overrun Mosul and Tikrit and appear to be preparing for a march on the capital. The two brigades that Suleimani offered are Asaab Ahel Haq, a Shi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Obama's foreign policy is unravelling... first Libya, Arab spring, the Asian pivot*  (that never happened), then Putin thumbs his nose at US in Crimea and now Iraq that was hard won after the surge and killing zawahiri is frittered away.

*China is steamrolling Japan, Vietnam and Philippines in south china sea

 

so much for leading from behind...

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

It suits US foreign policy and business interests to keep these areas in conflict.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

It suits US foreign policy and business interests to keep these areas in conflict.

The UK Gov too. Arms manufacturers dictate policy to all western governments. David Cameron, the UK prime minister often has a retinue of death dealers (as I like to call them) in toe when he travels around the world supposedly on diplomatic missions but in actual fact, he's only there to promote and push these death dealers onto other governments.

 

On the article, is it really surprising that a Shi'ite region like Persia is offering to help Iraq rid itself of Sunni fanatics? No doubt they're afraid of them spreading across all Shi'ite territories. So there's some degree of self-interest there.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The UK Gov too. Arms manufacturers dictate policy to all western governments. David Cameron, the UK prime minister often has a retinue of death dealers (as I like to call them) in toe when he travels around the world supposedly on diplomatic missions but in actual fact, he's only there to promote and push these death dealers onto other governments.

 

On the article, is it really surprising that a Shi'ite region like Persia is offering to help Iraq rid itself of Sunni fanatics? No doubt they're afraid of them spreading across all Shi'ite territories. So there's some degree of self-interest there.

Darn right there is - Iran has ALWAYS has aspirations of being a regional power-player (it didn't go away when the Shah went away).  Further, al-Maliki, despite being Sunni himself, is firmly in Iran's hip pocket - Iran therefore has a vested interest in seeing him stick.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

i've read years ago that Iraqis territories or some part of it will be merged with Iran eventually, all thanks to U.S campaigns to remove Saddam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Darn right there is - Iran has ALWAYS has aspirations of being a regional power-player (it didn't go away when the Shah went away).  Further, al-Maliki, despite being Sunni himself, is firmly in Iran's hip pocket - Iran therefore has a vested interest in seeing him stick.

Al Maliki is Shia. but you are spot on Iranian interests in Iraq.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Obama's foreign policy is unravelling... first Libya, Arab spring, the Asian pivot*  (that never happened), then Putin thumbs his nose at US in Crimea and now Iraq that was hard won after the surge and killing zawahiri is frittered away.

*China is steamrolling Japan, Vietnam and Philippines in south china sea

 

so much for leading from behind...

 

What do you want Obama to do? Occupy Iraq forever? Get involve in Libya, Arab Spring, Crimea?

 

Since when did the US became the world's police?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

What do you want Obama to do? Occupy Iraq forever? Get involve in Libya, Arab Spring, Crimea?

 

Since when did the US became the world's police?

People get upset when the US gets involved.  They get upset when the US doesn't get involved.

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

People get upset when the US gets involved.  They get upset when the US doesn't get involved.

adrynalyne - that is because they want a convenient whipping post  - and it can't be the UN.

 

The same folks that decry the United States "getting involved" also have no interest in  giving the United Nations (the only multinational "honest broker") the tools it needs to actually BE an honest broker.

 

For them, there are two sides - supporting the United States, and opposing the United States.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

What do you want Obama to do? Occupy Iraq forever? Get involve in Libya, Arab Spring, Crimea?

 

Since when did the US became the world's police?

lol Obama invaded Libya and that has turned out well hasn't it. Invasion isnt the answer to everything. frittering away hard won gains in Iraq either due incompetence or for deliberate ideological reasons

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

lol Obama invaded Libya and that has turned out well hasn't it. Invasion isnt the answer to everything. frittering away hard won gains in Iraq either due incompetence or for deliberate ideological reasons

When did Obama invade Libya?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Iraq and Iran have improved relations since the Iran-Iraq War, that was just in part by Saddam seeing an opportunity, a weakened Iran because of the revolution.

The way I see this is:

1. A neighbor trying help the Iraqi government fight militants (which are partially coming in from Syria, terrorists who were funded by the United States)

2. Trying to prevent terrorists entering from Iraq into Iran.

 

The fact that the militants are Sunni is irrelevant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

In fact, most terrorists if not all are not Sunni and are actually Wahhabi.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Nvm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

A country run by a religious shi'a government and a 90% shi'a population, Iran, helping another shi'a government, which are basically their puppets, and trying to keep them in power. What a surprise!!

 

It doesn't matter if iran fought iraq for 8 years. In iran's view they only fought saddam and the ba'ath party and their heretic (in shi'as' view) sunni forces.

 

Don't even think for a second that there is any other reason behind all this "helping" a neighbor.

 

A religious rule is the worst thing that could happen to a country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

What do you want Obama to do? Occupy Iraq forever? Get involve in Libya, Arab Spring, Crimea?

 

Since when did the US became the world's police?

 

Since they started interfering in world affairs and blowing sovereign nations into the stone age.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Since they started interfering in world affairs and blowing sovereign nations into the stone age.

And now (at least in this thread) there are people wanting us to do it again.

 

 

I'm all for staying out of other countries.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Since they started interfering in world affairs and blowing sovereign nations into the stone age.

you mean like sovereign Germany in 43 ? or sovereign Korea in 51? 

 

instead of grasping at extremes of invasion or isolationism. the real issue is declining fear / leverage of US under Obama.

Russia would have paid a heavy price diplomatically at the very least with what it pulled in Crimea.. essentially splitting Ukraine because it refused to toe Russian line. I dont think Putin would have done this under Clinton or Bush.

 

When did Obama invade Libya?

is google blocked in your country?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

is google blocked in your country?

Smartass comments won't get you anywhere. Google must really suck in Canada as I can't find anything about a US invasion of Libya.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

What do you want Obama to do? Occupy Iraq forever? Get involve in Libya, Arab Spring, Crimea?

 

Since when did the US became the world's police?

 

ok lets say us shouldnt be world police anymore. you know who would happily take over? russia, china and other countries with highly liberal and democratic standards. everyone should watch this and be aware. the world was never nor will it be completely peaceful.

even if we argue that iraq war was a mistake, it does NOT get better by doing a second mistake and goin out too early and leaving behind a mess.

in times of war people never should elect a former community organizer again. obama would have been an ideal president right in the time after the sowjet union collapsed. to negotiate the time after. but not now! he is affraid to even spell the word leadership. all he does is to react and not to act. he is one of the most passive presidents i have ever seen. and dont accuse me of being a republican, because i am not. i just hope the next one will be either clinton or bush (its kinda ironic isnt it?). they both are what the obama loving media insult as "mainstream" i would put them right (a bit) behind mitt romney when it comes to unideological problem solving. they will have to clean out the mess obama brought us in. why do i write us? because i mean all the western democratic liberal countries.

you dont like the usa or europe? fine, go and live in iran where they still hang people for being gay or live in russia where they nearly doing the same thing or chinese where there is only one party.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The Shi'ite has hit the fan.

What I don't get is, why the are fighting over Sonny and Cher - they haven't had a hit in decades.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

And now (at least in this thread) there are people wanting us to do it again.

 

 

I'm all for staying out of other countries.

adrynalyne - that is the same argument that was used after Saddam's atrocities were exposed - and the US (and the UK) rightly took heat for backing him.  And worse, the same folks whacking the US and UK in the press didn't want us getting rid of the madman (by any means, including diplomatic backchannels), while deploring our backing of a brutal dictator.  Sounds not only disingenuous, but a bit like "speaking out of both sides of the mouth".  Tell me - why are LIBERALS (anywhere) the ONLY group allowed to get away with that?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

One detail all of you overlook is this: Iraq as well as the other countries of the levante is an artifical country. Its borders were drawn after WWI following the interests of the western allies, completely ignoring existing tribal or religious borderlines.

Where do you think many of the conflicts the region has seen over the past decades come from?

Instead of desperately trying to maintain failed states in artificial borders the west should stay out of the area and let the people of the levante redraw the borders the way they should have been a hundred years ago. We can see a start of this in Iraq: the north is a quasi-independent Kurdistan, the Shi'ite parts of the country will sooner or later be an Iranian protectorate. The Sunni areas of Iraq and Syria are on the way to form a state of its own.

Real leadership would be to let the people of the mideast decide their own fate rather than keeping failed states alive by military interventions.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

One detail all of you overlook is this: Iraq as well as the other countries of the levante is an artifical country. Its borders were drawn after WWI following the interests of the western allies, completely ignoring existing tribal or religious borderlines.

Where do you think many of the conflicts the region has seen over the past decades come from?

Instead of desperately trying to maintain failed states in artificial borders the west should stay out of the area and let the people of the levante redraw the borders the way they should have been a hundred years ago. We can see a start of this in Iraq: the north is a quasi-independent Kurdistan, the Shi'ite parts of the country will sooner or later be an Iranian protectorate. The Sunni areas of Iraq and Syria are on the way to form a state of its own.

Real leadership would be to let the people of the mideast decide their own fate rather than keeping failed states alive by military interventions.

Landlocked Sunni areas with hostile Shia and Kurdish neighbors isnt really viable,

Kurds with their completely independent state.. which may cause trouble in Turkey and Iran where the Kurd minority is brutally suppressed. 

 

imo west should stop this fake self flaggellation  desperately trying to  grasp at the straws desperately to stay out of the conflict. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.