Thanks for the link Joe!
My recommendation from the cheap seats? Get US personnel out NOW!
You're about to see this country explode into three separate states...and there is nothing anyone can do to stop it.
Iraqi troops, security forces and tanks surged into Baghdad on Sunday as political turmoil deepened over who should lead the country.This shit is about to turn nasty.
Military tanks were deployed to several neighborhoods in central Baghdad, two Iraqi police officials told CNN. The officials said there are also significantly more troops in Baghdad's Green Zone, the secure area where many government buildings, the military headquarters and the U.S. Embassy are located.
The stepped-up troop presence comes as Iraqi forces battle Islamist militants in northern Iraq, and just after Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki accused Fuad Masum, Iraq's newly elected President, of violating the country's constitution by extending the deadline for Iraq's biggest political coalitions to nominate a candidate for prime minister.
The precise reason for the growing number of troops in the Iraqi capital was unclear. But CNN military analyst retired Lt. Col. Rick Francona described it as an "ominous" development that signals the Iraqi Prime Minister doesn't want to hand over power.
My recommendation from the cheap seats? Get US personnel out NOW!
You're about to see this country explode into three separate states...and there is nothing anyone can do to stop it.
Yeah, it looks like a coup.
ReplyDeletehttp://thepunditpress.com/2014/08/10/breaking-military-coup-rocks-iraq/
well for all intents and purposes you have three states right now, even if only one is recognized but ISIS while likely wont take baghdad is too strong to be pushed back is acting as a state, and Kurdish north has been a quasi state ever since after gulf war 1 and especially the second gulf war, i think effectively there are 3 states. Kurds wont give up their army, government or oil wealth without a fight, either to ISIS or baghdad, just depends on whether or not Iraq or if they can get any allies to actually push ISIS out of where it is right now.a
ReplyDeleteIf true we need to just protect the Kurds, let the center and south fight it out. Engage not bat shit crazy Sunnis to force out ISIS, just like we did with the Sunni Awakening, and stop using the Shia to fight the bat shit crazy Sunnis.
ReplyDeleteLong term the more established ISIS becomes the easier they are to kill when the time calls for it.
We're dropping bombs on the wrong Iraqis. This is like Vietnam all over again, with us supporting a corrupt, incompetent strongman that could give two shits about anybody that isn't an Iraqi Arab Shia.
ReplyDeleteWith Maliki doing this shit, we should pull the plug on everything, every spare part, every air plane in the pipeline, ever training/spares/logistics contractor contract, let Maliki try to run his private Army without spares or ammo. bitch
I get that Maliki is worthless, but to say we are dropping bombs on the wrong Iraqi's? I am confused do you think we should be giving supplies to ISIS? At least Maliki is not beheading children: http://www.catholic.org/news/international/middle_east/story.php?id=56490, the source is questionable, but the pictures do not lie. I am disappointed.
DeleteFive bucks says no one in the White House saw this coming. Do I have any takers?
ReplyDeleteYep.
DeleteHow are they going to justify their support for a dictatorship without contradicting everything they've been doing up till now?
I wouldnt mind a El-Sissi type chap comming to the top with this coup. But it is my understanding that the Army is currently loyal to the Prime Minister Al-Maliki ?
ReplyDeleteIt could re-start the same old Republican/Political Guard Bullshit that plague soo many Arab Armies. Then the best of US equipment will go to a Shiite Republican Guard with close links to Iran who guess what........Also have a Republican Guard.
Do about it?
ReplyDeleteSplitting Iraq into three separate states is what we should have done in 2004.
None of them powerful enough to threaten each other or their neighbors, and all internally self-directed and self-motivated.
We could have finally fixed the cobbled-together abortion of the post-WWI era, and simultaneously hamstrung the extremists, because they'd be too busy scheming against each other to bother anyone else.
"Mission accomplished", and we could have been on the road 9 years, $2Trillion, and several thousand body bags, arms, and legs earlier.
How about not invading Iraq on false pretenses in the first place. Sadam for all his faults was still better than anything you have now and don't forget process to get this far got nearly 500.000 people killed.
DeleteI'm sorry, but i dont really get the point you're making ? You saying US should have gone in, broken up Iraq and left ? You think that would have fixed the situation ? By the way, i'm not even sure what you suggest could have been fixed that way ... Just trying to understand, but makes no sense to me.
DeleteWhat I get, is that long term presence there cost lots of money, lives and limbs, no doubt, but if you wanted to avoid that, wouldnt have it been better not to invade at all ?
After all, you're saying they should fix their mess now, might as well have said that back then and spared several thousands of US lives (+ tens of thousand of Iraqis) ... Maybe I'm missing something
Mr. T is right.
DeleteThose of us who opposed the Iraq invasion back in '03 saw this situation coming, but we were ignored. Saddam was a scumbag, sure. So were his psychopathic sons. But his Iraq was a more stable, prosperous, and less murderous place than what we have now, more than a decade later.
The only answer at this point is to either move in and run the place ourselves, colonial-style, or let it – and the region burn. But as a country, we're too chicken-shit to do either, so we continue with half-measures.
Only someone utterly and willfully ignorant of the reasons for going into Iraq leading up to 2003 would argue that it was any such pretext.
DeleteThe question at the time wasn't whether we were going in: that was a foregone conclusion.
The entire issue was what to do with our chew toy once we owned it, and when to get out.
Meals-On-Wheels nation-building has been a failure of biblically epic proportions, for exactly the blood and treasure cost reasons outlined.
Any Iraq that continues to rely on the inherent (non-existent) stability of an incohesive area cobbled together of three mutually loathsome factions for its long-term viability is destined to fail, exactly like Yugoslavia did, and for exactly the same reasons, the minute the local version of Tito leaves the picture.
Three resulting smaller nations based on the ethnic majorities that exist would have troubled no one but themselves.
Send in Kerry. He can fix it.
ReplyDeleteHell yes! With "Two Blasts" Biden riding shotgun and Hilary C on piano.
DeleteObama will be in a bunker somewhere. No not a military one on a golf course silly. :)
Well, you can cross that topic off your list (for now) ... Iraqi Supreme Court just confirmed Maliki as rightful prime-minister. What this means militarily remains to be seen, but it's also a blow for the US administration, who wanted him ousted. President Masum, who had the support of the US in this struggle against Maliki, turns out to have lost the fight.
ReplyDeleteI'm not very optimistic about the possible implications this might have for a "national consensus" government that would be able to successfully combat ISIS, at least not short term. Containment may be possible, roll back not at this stage.
What I'm wondering now, is wether or not ISIS is gonna trying "something" in the greater Baghdad area ... wouldnt be surprised if they did.
Are the Iraqi Supreme court Judges politically apointed so that they always favor the Prime Minister ?
DeleteI think so.
People who follow and study Stars (Heavenly Body Stars, not Justin Bieber) now know how a Star Collapses. Lots of hot air from the inside.lol.
I'm not disputing that the fact you mention, but that's a sidenote ... from a institutional point of view, the attempt to oust Maliki has failed. He's the head of the largest party in Parliament and is now officially in charge of forming new government. Masum and his backers have lost that battle.
DeleteThe "legality" or partisan character of the judges' decisions has no bearing on the consequences this might have on the battlefield.
In Hindi, the word Masum means Innocent.
DeleteI bet the Al Maliki and his supporters will now go on a second wave of murders against the backers of the President and all who opposed him.
DeleteThink the lists have been drawn up a long time ago. Might not be Maliki's top priority right now, but once a new government is formed, I guess the Masum supporters should beef up their security details ... Politics is an very risky entrepreneurial business in Iraq ! Guess it has a higher attrition rate than the current Iraqi army
DeleteLol, Maliki is still the prime-minister?
DeleteThe Kurds better get some support for their independence, and it better come fast.
The best thing here to do would be-
ReplyDelete1.) The US to cobble up on its own or with allies a tough UN-Blue Helmet Force for defensive operations in the Kurdish Area only. Forget offence for now. I think a western Division level force with Kurdish Army backed with US Air Operations would be more than enough for ISIS to Launch a ground invasion.
2.) Along with this, immediatly release funds so that the Kurdish Army can have their 3-4 months backlog of wages and so that the slightly more efficient Kurdish bureacracy can also spin its wheels in motion. Dont "Donate" them the money. A soft loan of 1% so that even they know the value of money and still realise that this is a good deal.
3.) The UN Force of a division plus can then be relieved stage by stage as Kurds get more combat worthy.
4.) Get the Turks to be more involved with Kurds. Infrastructure projects, rail/road links, University students exchange programs, business linkages, passports on arrival etc.
5.) Sooner rather than later, the US will have to sit down for a no-BS conversation with Iran about the status of Iraq. That is if the US hasnt already done that in back level conversations.
6.) The Kurds are an opprotunity to exploit in the fact that they actually want to fight for themselves rather than being cajoled on by some third party. You have to be willing and able. The kurds are one half of it. The country that provides the other half will have a huge leverage over Iraq in particular and Middle East in General.
7.) Do that before Rosoboronexport lands a major soft loan deal worth a couple of squadrons of Mi-24/17 combo and other assorted anti-tank, anti vehicle weapons and BMP's and the lot. Vlad Putin will then be seen as a hero of Russian Industry and the eternal thanks of the "Willing and Able" Kurdish People.
If you want to see the Positive in even the worst bullshit, this is the best Spin that i can provide short of saying that the 2003 invasion in itself was a sham.
DeleteBut time cannot be reversed and what we play with are the cards we are dealt with. This is the situation here and now. And this is about as positive as its going to get for a while. Provided we play our cards right.
Sounds like a plan ! please mail it to:
DeleteJohn Kerry
US Secretary of State
Department of State
Harry S. Truman Building
2201 C Street,
NW Washington, D.C.
I think they're in desperate need of any "out of the box" thinking !
If the White House had any idea of what to do, we'd be seeing something similar to your listing happen. It's very solid.
DeleteApparently there is an increase in military aid from the US to the Kurds going on, but "increased" is a very relative term. Also, it was linked to the Iraqi government. Let's not ignore the fact the US-backed Maliki is apparently trying to arrest the elected president of Iraq, a kurd.
My guess is Russia is already in talks with the kurds for military equipment and will deliver it swiftly just like they did to Iraq if the US doesn't acts quickly enough (which is my guess).
The Kurds don't need loans, they just need authorization of weapons sales and recognition of statehood so they can sell their oil. The Kurds have already made peace with the Turks and used the oil to make Turkey a transit point/ally/supporter. The Kurds right now have roughly a billion dollars worth of raw crude floating in 4 super tankers in legal limbo because of Iraqi gov disputing the sale, and the tanks at the Turkish port are full to capacity. One of those tankers is now in the Gulf of Mexico the US should buy it and give the Kurds the weapons they need.
Delete-No major boots on the ground maybe some FAC, SOF, and trainers so the first two can be replaced by Kurdish.
-Air support, intelligence , etc..
-Have the US gov buy the oil we need to cap off the strategic reserve anyway. Approve the Kurds for weapons sales all the way up to heavy weapons tanks and helo's.
-No support for the Iraqi gov until Maliki steps down make it clear and if they wish to be a Iranian proxy under Maliki a Shia version of Saddam let them wallow in that failure.
-Support whatever is left of the Sunni reasonables leveraging the Kurds and the ties to the Sunnis they have held open unlike Maliki, maybe small arms etc.
The decision to hold Iraq together as a stable democratic nation in the ME swamp was decided years ago when we sided with Iran and Maliki against Alawi's inclusive multi-ethnic coalition so the great O could meet his artificial time table. The result is what we got their is not putting it back together the awakening was double crossed by Maliki the Kurds went their own way and Maliki is now openly standing with Iran.
C-Low, I was going to point out the kurds need only independence instead of money thrown at them in my previous post, but you put it in a much better way.
DeleteThe Kurds can take care if themselves. The one thing that needs to go are the chains that bind them.
4 supertankers of oil doesn't does not make an economy let alone nation building. You will need funding for a host of needs and infrastructure requirements.
DeleteWhy I specifically mentioned the UN-Blue Helmet force was because this is the time when the world would rather appreciate a UN guised operation rather than what could be perceived as "Iraq War 3- American Reciprocity Returns".
Money should never be thrown at anyone for a fool and his money are easily parted this stands true for both the donator and the recipient as they both need intelligence to manage money.
And, I am deadly serious about the Sooner or later Iran Conversation part. That point needs all the stress and attention it can get. If you admit that ISIS has Saudi written all over it than Maliki is playing in the Iranian Shia backyard.
DeleteDon't let the Kurds fall victim again to Sunni/Shia political calculations.
What the hell will replacing Maliki accomplish now?
ReplyDeleteThe north has thrown off the south and might even be able to subjugate it.
Why would they accept a compromise candidate? Why would Isis let them?
A coup in the south now merely weakens them further.
Given Obama's track record it makes perfect sense that this is the course taken
But its a very bad call.
Time passes and the borders and lines drawn on November 1920 now dissolve.
ReplyDeleteRedrawing the map, rewriting history.
The British got this mess going after the Ottoman defeat in World War One.
If we arm and protect the Kurds they will be where Israel is today, Modern, prosperous and under continuous attack by every Muslim country around them.
It will be another Gaza, West Bank Palestinian issue all over again.
The US will suffer attacks by those who wish to return Kurdistan to the Iraqi's.
Yet, we cannot just allow the Kurds to be slaughtered, yet anywhere we send them there will be a new Zion for Arabs to hate.'
We stay out or go balls deep, no half dicking around or else this will haunt the world of the future.
Make a choice and stick with it, look away or get some.
Floggin' Islam, a curse on the world.
While Kurdistan is among the most religiously diverse and tolerant populations in the region, you're aware the majority of Kurds are Sunni Muslim, right?
DeleteHmm...so President legally appoints new PM....current PM refuses to resign....current PM's party votes him out...current PM refuses to resign...current PM places tanks and troops around capital city and said city's "Green Zone"....U.S administration strongly backs new PM....current PM known to have strong Iranian backing in the past....
ReplyDeleteFlashpoint anyone?
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteWell guess what, Abadi is also backed by the Iranians ! Anybody who's gonna be offered to form a government in Iraq, wether that is constitutionnally legal or not, will have Iranian backing. And at this point in time, it seems the Iranians even favour Abadi over Maliki.
DeleteAnd it' doesnt take much to guess that the US and Iran have "synchronized" their positions on this issue.
It's still very doubtful that Abadi will be able to form a government, as his nomination as PM "to be" is a long stretch legally, and I'm pretty sure Maliki has already put his "lobyists" to work to try and avoid any member of his party backing Abadi. You know accidents happen quite easily in Iraq, you might fall of a bridge or ram your car into a wall ... or worse get mugged and shot by thiefs.
As Gen. Westmoreland used to say, it's gonna get worse before it's gonna get better ... or maybe it'll just get worse.