Real World Event Discussions

White House: Everything’s Fine in Iraq as Ramadi Falls

POSTED BY: Jongsstraw
UPDATED: Tuesday, December 10, 2024 22:05
VIEWED: 5597
PAGE 5 of 6

Sunday, May 24, 2015 10:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by THGRRI:
Ideology, is "the imaginary relation to the real conditions of existence." It can be described as a set of conscious and unconscious ideas which make up one's goals, expectations, and motivations.

Ideology refers to the system of abstracted meaning applied to public matters, thus making this concept central to politics. Implicitly, in societies that distinguish between public and private life, every political or economic tendency entails ideology, whether or not it is propounded as an explicit system of thought.

Some can learn new facts and change their opinions, at least shift them a bit.

Alas, you don't appear to be one of them.

Yanno, THUGR, when I started looking at this region of the world, Saudi Arabia as the nexus of Islamic terrorism wasn't even in my mental map. But I stumbled across too many irrefutable facts: too many planeloads of arms to Libya and Syrian terrorists, too much money to fundamentalist maddrassas in Pakistan and Sudan, too many terrorist operations in Chechnya and Afghanistan, too much direct military intervention on behalf of ISIS and al Qaida ... too many solid and irrefutable on-the-ground facts, too much ground truth ... to ignore. Too many bits and pieces that only fit into only one kind of picture.

Man, I have to say, you would suck at being a military strategist. You're too much of an idealogue.



--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Sunday, May 24, 2015 10:44 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
.... there are basic things which we all can agree on, but for some reason, take another couple of steps down that road, and all hell breaks loose.

Suddenly AURaptor is the voice of reason? Tell me that Obama needs to pay Iraq with even more American blood and money after you reason your way through this: Iraqi security forces vastly outnumbered ISIS fighters. In Ramadi it was 2000 Iraqi troops against 200 ISIS.

"This was a classic breakdown of a military unit, the worst I've ever seen, that allowed ISIS to take down Ramadi without a fight," one U.S. official said condition of anonymity.

So what happened to the Iraqi army the West paid for?

Across the country, the reality on the ground stands in stark contrast to what it should be. On paper, some 350,000 soldiers and 650,000 police stand ready to take on ISIS. In truth, many of the rank-and-file men rarely wear a uniform.

Senior officers buy their commissions, often at exorbitant cost. They ensure they would profit from their time in the army, taking bribes not just from the population but from officers and men beneath them.

Then there are the country's estimated 50,000 "ghost soldiers" who pay a portion of their salaries to their superiors in order not to show up for duty. While al-Abadi has vowed to put an end to the huge scam, this is thought to be a key reason Iraq's U.S.-trained military has proven largely ineffective in the face of ISIS.

And if soldiers aren't paying to be absent, they have to buy their own army issue boots. In numerous battles with ISIS, Iraq's troops complain that they haven't enough ammunition. Some have used pistols against ISIS' anti-aircraft guns. Apparently Iraqi officers are selling the ammo, maybe to ISIS.
www.nbcnews.com/news/world/neely-ramadi-n361811

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Sunday, May 24, 2015 11:03 PM

Welcome to the debate TWO. The issues are a bit complex for some here. Like the fact that it is Sunni vs. Shia and not about Iraq and whether or not it will survive as a country. Once they make their choices over there and things become more clear, we will be better able to assist. Till then it is a fools game. I don't wish to get further caught up in a thousand year war over there.

Right now the world is experiencing major land grabs in the middle east, Asia and Europe as well. The neocons in this country have shown they are not only not up to the job, but woefully lacking in brain power to deal with it. We live in times where rushing in only creates more problems.

This is an actual Fox headline: (Carter saying Iraqi forces losing 'will to fight' sparks more criticism, concern about Obama plan). Why is it some think we should fight the Iraqis' battle for them and Irans' as well? Is it because they screwed things up so badly themselves they are desperate to point the finger elsewhere?


Sunni and Shia: The Worlds of Islam

While the Islamic world is predominantly of the Sunni sect, the Muslims who live in the Middle East, and particularly those in the Persian Gulf region, are often Shiite. Globally, the Shia account for an estimated 10 or 15 percent of the Muslim population, but in the Middle East their numbers are much higher: they dominate the population of Iran, compose a majority in Iraq, and are significant minorities in other nations, including Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Pakistan, and Syria. Outside of the region, Shia generally constitute only tiny minorities in other Muslim countries, including Algeria, Sudan, and Egypt in Northern Africa.


NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Sunday, May 24, 2015 11:57 PM

But, yanno THUGR, this isn't just a pointless religion-based land-grab. If it weren't for the oil and gas underneath the Mideast, nobody would care to fight over the sandpiles (except Israeli Zionists and Saudi Wahabbis, but that's another story.) There is a huge gas deposit underneath Iran and Qatar, and the most direct route to Europe is thru Iraq and Syria to the Mediterranean. But Shiites (Iraq, Syria, Iran) are in the way.

There is also the issue of what a nation is willing to do to get control of the pipeline routes, and in the case of the Saudis and Qataris that means supporting ISIS and al Qaida.


--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Monday, May 25, 2015 4:36 AM

" So what happened to the Iraqi army the West paid for? "


I don't know if it was General Schwarzkopf, or some one else, but after the Gulf War, one of our guys said something to the effect of " We could have given them our gear and our guys used theirs, and we'd still would have kicked their ass. "

Takes more than hardware to win a war.

Takes training, commitment, will, tactics, leadership... all of which the Iraqi army woefully lacked.

NOTIFY: N  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Monday, May 25, 2015 5:00 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
" So what happened to the Iraqi army the West paid for? "


I don't know if it was General Schwarzkopf, or some one else, but after the Gulf War, one of our guys said something to the effect of " We could have given them our gear and our guys used theirs, and we'd still would have kicked their ass. "

Takes more than hardware to win a war.

Takes training, commitment, will, tactics, leadership... all of which the Iraqi army woefully lacked.



Exactly, so if they aren't going to defend themselves and fight to keep Iraq whole, which includes sharing power with the Sunni's, fuckem. Right or wrong, we went into Iraq to get Saddam and the WMD's and nothing else. So stop your bitching about Ramadi. When the Sunni's take back the country they will deal with IsIs. Besides, let Iran get bogged down fighting IsIs while we pick and choose our targets.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Monday, May 25, 2015 5:26 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Takes more than hardware to win a war.

Takes training, commitment, will, tactics, leadership... all of which the Iraqi army woefully lacked.

Maybe ISIS will train Iraq better than the USA did. The Iraqi army is many times larger than ISIS, whichever estimate you use for ISIS. And Iraq has a huge pile of American made ammo that never seems to make it to the battlefield.
http://warontherocks.com/2015/02/how-many-fighters-does-the-islamic-st
ate-really-have
/

ISIS is outnumbered and outgunned by Iraq, and yet the liars and thieves in charge of the Iraqi Army are expecting Obama to save them. Republicans also expect Obama to do Iraq's fighting. Until the Iraqis pull themselves together, I wish that Obama would continuously remind Iraqis and Republicans that the Iraqis can choose to either fight like men or die like chickens with their heads chopped off. And Iraqi generals ought to stop selling ammo to ISIS, even though it is very profitable.
www.nytimes.com/2014/10/06/world/isis-ammunition-is-shown-to-have-orig
ins-in-us-and-china.html

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Monday, May 25, 2015 9:11 PM

Let’s take a moment shall we. John McCain the neocons and now the Republican candidates for President, want us to gather up the Kurds and the rest of the Middle Eastern armies and get them with our help to fight ISIS. Sounds like what Obama is trying to do that the Republicans say is not a good plan. The trick is to do it while not advancing the strategies of the Iranians to dominate Iraq, Syria, Yemen and Lebanon, as well as attaining nuclear weapons. This is the part that requires intelligence beyond any the Republicans have displayed when discussing the current situation publicly.

When prodded the Republicans go back and forth complaining we should have done more in Syria. Like sent military help and bombed Assad. That we should send troops into Iraq and even Libya to stop ISIS there(once you go in you can never leave and you can't defeat ISIS without marching into Syria as well). The Republicans want us to get more involved militarily in the Ukraine, (We are sending them humanitarian supplies training their troops and sharing intelligence, while holding military exercises in Europe to ease the minds of those concerned about Russian expansionism) and get ready, we need to bomb Iran because there is no deal that can be made we can trust.(In other words do the bidding of Israel rather than what is best for us).

Oh yeah, we have China building islands in the China Sea’s that are filling our Asian allies with concerns of Chinese expansionism. They are also striking deals and cozying up to the Russians. I think the Republicans would lead us into World War III if given the chance, and my hope is they don’t get that chance.


NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Monday, May 25, 2015 10:47 PM

Neocons are stupid about the potential of military action. They think everything can be solved if you just bomb it. A couple of quick comments:

There are neocons in both parties; you don't have to be Republican to be an idiot. And AFA I can tell, the way Hillary, from her perch in the State Department, managed the gun-running-from-Benghazi-to-Syria operation, and the shit that she (or her subordinate, Nuland) got us into in Ukraine, she's also a necon, and a really stupid one at that. Because she decided to crank up these hot spots, she got Russia involved. And our military may be able to walk over partially-developed Mideast nations, but we're not about to take on Russia and win. Not only that, but her actions came at about the time that Obama was trying to "pivot to Asia". Didn't she believe in coordinating her activities with the President and the DoD? All Syria and Ukraine managed to do was force Russia and China into each others arms, and what a fatal mistake that was!

Our budget, and our military, is wildly overextended. Geopolitically and economically, we're extremely vulnerable. If Obama is making nice with Iran, that's the only sensible thing to do, even if it means pissing off the Saudis. The problem with that is, the Saudis have no problem sending terrorists to kill people anywhere in the world: Russia, France .... the USA. Anywhere. It's something we would need to be prepared for. (And don't expect any help from Israel, they've got a deal going with ISIS etc.)

Since bombing/ invading/ destabilizing nation after nation got us into this mess, anyone who thinks that more of the same is "the answer" should have their head examined, preferably by MRI, to see if there is any gray matter between the ears. Even McCain had to good sense to refuse the "consultancy" that Kiev offered him.

The Republican "solution" is a terrible idea, but Hillary's approach was just about the same.





--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Monday, May 25, 2015 11:03 PM

Well, whaddaya know? Just as I was explaining the Saudi response ....

How we know that we pissed off the Saudis: ISIS (their tool) issues a not-so-veiled threat against the USA

ISIS Planning US Nuclear Attack In Next 12 Months: Report

Quote:

Let me throw a hypothetical operation onto the table. The Islamic State has billions [Billions? Like, from their "Saudi friends" and "illegal oil sales thru Turkey" billions?- SIGNY] of dollars in the bank, so they call on their wil?yah in Pakistan to purchase a nuclear device through weapons dealers with links to corrupt officials in the region.

The weapon is then transported overland until it makes it to Libya, where the muj?hid?n move it south to Nigeria. Drug shipments from Columbia bound for Europe pass through West Africa, so moving other types of contraband from East to West is just as possible.

The nuke and accompanying muj?hid?n arrive on the shorelines of South America and are transported through the porous borders of Central America before arriving in Mexico and up to the border with the United States.

From there it’s just a quick hop through a smuggling tunnel and hey presto, they’re mingling with another 12 million “illegal” aliens in America with a nuclear bomb in the trunk of their car.

Perhaps such a scenario is far-fetched but it’s the sum of all fears for Western intelligence agencies and it’s infinitely more possible today than it was just one year ago. And if not a nuke, what about a few thousand tons of ammonium nitrate explosive?

That’s easy enough to make. The Islamic State make no secret of the fact they have every intention of attacking America on its home soil and they’re not going to mince about with two muj?hid?n taking down a dozen casualties if it originates from the Caliphate. They’ll be looking to do something big, something that would make any past operation look like a squirrel shoot, and the more groups that pledge allegiance the more possible it becomes to pull off something truly epic.

Remember, all of this has happened in less than a year. How more dangerous will be the lines of communication and supply a year on from today? If the West completely failed to spot the emergence of the Islamic State and then the allies who so quickly pledged allegiance to it from around the world, what else of massive significance are they going to miss next?



Well, first of all, the rise of ISIS wasn't exactly unnoticed.

So, not so much of a "plan", more like a cross between a "daydream" and a "threat". IF they were REALLY planning this, we wouldn't hear about it. Warning shot from the Saudis.


--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME