Iraqi PM declares "State of Emergency" as ISIS occupy Mosul

[Yumyumsuppertime]

How much popular support does the government have vs. the rebels, and would Western troops have a chance of being seen as liberators and peacekeepers rather than invaders and torturers, especially considering America's rather shaky recent past in the region?

I don't believe anyone is suggesting having Western troops anywhere.
Just send in air support to bomb the shit out of ISIS and let the Iraqi army have the glory, that'll fix the government's support problem right there.

Oh, good, more families on Al Jazeera pointing at the rubble of where their homes used to be as they wail about their drone-slaughtered children.

[Costa Fierro]

How much popular support does the government have vs. the rebels, and would Western troops have a chance of being seen as liberators and peacekeepers rather than invaders and torturers, especially considering America's rather shaky recent past in the region?

The Iraqi Army has had a mass influx of volunteers wanting to join.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

How much popular support does the government have vs. the rebels, and would Western troops have a chance of being seen as liberators and peacekeepers rather than invaders and torturers, especially considering America's rather shaky recent past in the region?

The Iraqi Army has had a mass influx of volunteers wanting to join.

Source? And if they're so well-staffed, why are they having such issues with this insurgency?

[Costa Fierro]

The Iraqi Army has had a mass influx of volunteers wanting to join.

Source? And if they're so well-staffed, why are they having such issues with this insurgency?

Here. And they didn't have a problem with staff. But for some reason, the Iraqi army surrendered in droves.

[Master Shake]

Source? And if they're so well-staffed, why are they having such issues with this insurgency?

Here. And they didn't have a problem with staff. But for some reason, the Iraqi army surrendered in droves.

They need better leadership so they can be lead to victory!

[Greed and Death]

Source? And if they're so well-staffed, why are they having such issues with this insurgency?

Here. And they didn't have a problem with staff. But for some reason, the Iraqi army surrendered in droves.

The problem is a lot of the leadership from before is either aligned with the sunni faction, in prison, or dead.

Current military leadership in the Iraq is rather inexperienced and poorly trained. It would have taken another decade atleast to get them up to snuff.

[Condunum]

In a surprise move one of you will be drafted to be Pm or Iraq, required to remain in office and Baghdad until the end of this civil war.

I'll volunteer, only to immediately abuse my powers and turn Baghdad into a fortress city. Fuck the rest of Iraq, we'll just borrow NK's artillery arsenal and bomb the whole fucking place to pieces.

And then my Baghdad master race will repopulate the world Iraq

[Volnotova]

I'm quite certain the government has far more popular support, even from some Sunnis. ISIS has been disowned by Al-Qaeda, and is murdering people in the streets of Mosul. The government may not be very popular, but any rational person would rather have Maliki than ISIL.

It doesn't matter if they dislike or even hate ISIL, as long as they are simply too terrified to do anything about it. (And they have good reasons for that)

And no one is proposing ground units, but a few drone strikes and maybe some bombers out of our bases in Bahrain and Saudi Arabia might not hurt.

Problem is, their forces are too dispersed.

Besides that, civilian casualties are likely that would further enflame the Sunni extremists ("Look at the American infidels propping up the Shia apostates!").

[Estado Paulista]

It's their choice, but unless they divide, there might not be a functioning Iraq left.

There was a functioning Iraq to begin with?

Not since the decline of Sumeria.

[Senkaku]

I'm quite certain the government has far more popular support, even from some Sunnis. ISIS has been disowned by Al-Qaeda, and is murdering people in the streets of Mosul. The government may not be very popular, but any rational person would rather have Maliki than ISIL.

It doesn't matter if they dislike or even hate ISIL, as long as they are simply too terrified to do anything about it. (And they have good reasons for that)

And no one is proposing ground units, but a few drone strikes and maybe some bombers out of our bases in Bahrain and Saudi Arabia might not hurt.

Problem is, their forces are too dispersed.

Besides that, civilian casualties are likely that would further enflame the Sunni extremists ("Look at the American infidels propping up the Shia apostates!").

Their forces are dispersed, yes, but they have troop concentrations in Baiji, Tikrit, and several other towns. Using intelligence provided by either aerial surveillance or the Iraqi Army, drones or manned aircraft equipped with guided missiles or laser-guided bombs could support Iraqi troops and help slow or halt the advance. That, combined with Peshmerga and Iraqi Army counterattacks, could be sufficient to hold ISIL at bay, if not necessarily retake Mosul.
And let's be honest, whichever way you do things (Iraqi soldiers or American aircraft) there will be civilian casualties, and ISIL will use them to inflame the passions of their fighters even further. Right now, it's not about how inflamed the passions of their fighters are, it's about preserving Iraq's government and military and the capital.

Now, if the Assad regime gives anyone permission to use drones in their territory, I would advocate absolutely pounding Raqqa, which appears to be their current power base.


Frankly, I hope the Iranians think about sending a larger force in. Currently they have 500 Revolutionary Guard and 150 Quds Force. If they want to be seen as a regional power, they ought to step in a little more.

[Volnotova]

It doesn't matter if they dislike or even hate ISIL, as long as they are simply too terrified to do anything about it. (And they have good reasons for that)



Problem is, their forces are too dispersed.

Besides that, civilian casualties are likely that would further enflame the Sunni extremists ("Look at the American infidels propping up the Shia apostates!").

Their forces are dispersed, yes, but they have troop concentrations in Baiji, Tikrit, and several other towns. Using intelligence provided by either aerial surveillance or the Iraqi Army, drones or manned aircraft equipped with guided missiles or laser-guided bombs could support Iraqi troops and help slow or halt the advance. That, combined with Peshmerga and Iraqi Army counterattacks, could be sufficient to hold ISIL at bay, if not necessarily retake Mosul.
And let's be honest, whichever way you do things (Iraqi soldiers or American aircraft) there will be civilian casualties, and ISIL will use them to inflame the passions of their fighters even further. Right now, it's not about how inflamed the passions of their fighters are, it's about preserving Iraq's government and military and the capital.

Now, if the Assad regime gives anyone permission to use drones in their territory, I would advocate absolutely pounding Raqqa, which appears to be their current power base.


Frankly, I hope the Iranians think about sending a larger force in. Currently they have 500 Revolutionary Guard and 150 Quds Force. If they want to be seen as a regional power, they ought to step in a little more.

This.

I hope the powers in the region (including the United States) would be willing to temporarily set aside their differences (if only in regards to ISIL/ISIS) to deal with what has arguably become the greatest threat to the region's stability.

I also wondered why they haven't tried targetting their source of revenue: The oil and gas fields (especially in eastern Syria).

It really has gotten out of control to the point were ISIL/ISIS is starting to become better equiped than the Syrian army.

[Laurasia]

I was watching a Special Report earlier about the ISIS actions in Iraq. President Obama was stating the government's position that they were considering options for intervention in Iraq besides putting boots on the ground.

In other words, the US won't do jack.

Exactly! What is happening right now in Iraq and Afghanistan is a recurrence of what happened in Vietnam forty years ago. The United States attempts to go into a country; thousands of American lives and billions of dollars are blown as the U.S. attempts to be the "policeman" of the world. And then once the American forces leave a country, then it goes right back to where it was before.

[Geilinor]

In other words, the US won't do jack.

Exactly! What is happening right now in Iraq and Afghanistan is a recurrence of what happened in Vietnam forty years ago. The United States attempts to go into a country; thousands of American lives and billions of dollars are blown as the U.S. attempts to be the "policeman" of the world. And then once the American forces leave a country, then it goes right back to where it was before.

It hasn't gone back to where it was before. This situation is more like Afghanistan in the early 1990s, not Iraq pre-2003.

[Senkaku]

Their forces are dispersed, yes, but they have troop concentrations in Baiji, Tikrit, and several other towns. Using intelligence provided by either aerial surveillance or the Iraqi Army, drones or manned aircraft equipped with guided missiles or laser-guided bombs could support Iraqi troops and help slow or halt the advance. That, combined with Peshmerga and Iraqi Army counterattacks, could be sufficient to hold ISIL at bay, if not necessarily retake Mosul.
And let's be honest, whichever way you do things (Iraqi soldiers or American aircraft) there will be civilian casualties, and ISIL will use them to inflame the passions of their fighters even further. Right now, it's not about how inflamed the passions of their fighters are, it's about preserving Iraq's government and military and the capital.

Now, if the Assad regime gives anyone permission to use drones in their territory, I would advocate absolutely pounding Raqqa, which appears to be their current power base.


Frankly, I hope the Iranians think about sending a larger force in. Currently they have 500 Revolutionary Guard and 150 Quds Force. If they want to be seen as a regional power, they ought to step in a little more.

This.

I hope the powers in the region (including the United States) would be willing to temporarily set aside their differences (if only in regards to ISIL/ISIS) to deal with what has arguably become the greatest threat to the region's stability.

I also wondered why they haven't tried targetting their source of revenue: The oil and gas fields (especially in eastern Syria).

It really has gotten out of control to the point were ISIL/ISIS is starting to become better equiped than the Syrian army.

I've read several articles that say Iran is considering reaching out to the US for bilateral cooperation on the subject, which means the potential collapse of Iraq may also represent a positive turning point in American-Iranian relations. Not sure how I feel about that. :/

And the reasons the oil and gas fields haven't been bombed are:
A) the Western powers won't intervene in Syria.
B) the Syrian government is trying to preserve its assets and use them to keep a hold on its territory.
C) In Iraq, at least, the Kurds control the Kirkuk fields, and Baghdad controls the southern ones (sorta). Those that have been taken haven't been attacked because the Iraqi military doesn't have sufficient aircraft, doesn't want to risk what it has, may not have the expertise or weaponry to attack oil fields, and, in the event they retake the fields, probably doesn't want to have to rebuild them and temporarily lose their revenue.

[Rio Cana]

This news is from three hours ago from Reuters. Its on the Kurds. It really seems we will be getting a new nation in that part of the world.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/06/ ... 6U20140613

Has for the Iraqi central government saying they have hit back, some think its all hype.

They say even US advisors on an airbase just North of the Iraqi Capital have left. Some wonder if they are making sure US weapons do not fall into enemy hands.

[Laurasia]

Exactly! What is happening right now in Iraq and Afghanistan is a recurrence of what happened in Vietnam forty years ago. The United States attempts to go into a country; thousands of American lives and billions of dollars are blown as the U.S. attempts to be the "policeman" of the world. And then once the American forces leave a country, then it goes right back to where it was before.

It hasn't gone back to where it was before. This situation is more like Afghanistan in the early 1990s, not Iraq pre-2003.

I was not meaning in the sense of going back to being the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein. What I meant is that Iraq is descending back into anarchy, corruption, and so forth. American troops needed to prop the country's government up, in the wake of Saddam's overthrow; now that they are gone, another dictatorship will take power there.

[Volnotova]

B) the Syrian government is trying to preserve its assets and use them to keep a hold on its territory.

Another thing I read is that there is now a bizarre situation where the Syrian government has to buy electricity from ISIL.

Regardless, something needs to be done to stop these people. And it is going to hurt to all sides.

C) In Iraq, at least, the Kurds control the Kirkuk fields, and Baghdad controls the southern ones (sorta). Those that have been taken haven't been attacked because the Iraqi military doesn't have sufficient aircraft, doesn't want to risk what it has, may not have the expertise or weaponry to attack oil fields, and, in the event they retake the fields, probably doesn't want to have to rebuild them and temporarily lose their revenue.

I was mostly referring to those in eastern Syria.

[United Marxist Nations]

This news is from three hours ago from Reuters. Its on the Kurds. It really seems we will be getting a new nation in that part of the world.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/06/ ... 6U20140613

We pretty much already had one.

[Volnotova]

This news is from three hours ago from Reuters. Its on the Kurds. It really seems we will be getting a new nation in that part of the world.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/06/ ... 6U20140613

Has for the Iraqi central government saying they have hit back, some think its all hype.

They say even US advisors on an airbase just North of the Iraqi Capital have left. Some wonder if they are making sure US weapons do not fall into enemy hands.

ISIL (as a whole) might have less manpower (although this is being addressed as we speak and they have gained a lot of new recruits and freed fighters recently), they are (I'd argue) better equiped, and even their funding is starting to become roughly on par with them.

Besides that, they are battle-hardened, even more so than the Peshmerga.

There might be some distance between Mosul and Kirkuk and it's heavily fortified by highly motivated troops, but while they might not try to capture it now, they will eventually.

[Senkaku]

This news is from three hours ago from Reuters. Its on the Kurds. It really seems we will be getting a new nation in that part of the world.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/06/ ... 6U20140613

Has for the Iraqi central government saying they have hit back, some think its all hype.

They say even US advisors on an airbase just North of the Iraqi Capital have left. Some wonder if they are making sure US weapons do not fall into enemy hands.

ISIL (as a whole) might have less manpower (although this is being addressed as we speak and they have gained a lot of new recruits and freed fighters recently), they are (I'd argue) better equiped, and even their funding is starting to become roughly on par with them.

Besides that, they are battle-hardened, even more so than the Peshmerga.

There might be some distance between Mosul and Kirkuk and it's heavily fortified by highly motivated troops, but while they might not try to capture it now, they will eventually.

I think, especially with Iraqi Army equipment, the Peshmerga will be able to crush any ISIL attacks. Remember, they've got motivation too- this is their homeland and they've fought hard for it, and they want to see an independent Kurdistan.

At this point, while cities to the north and west of it may, I don't think Baghdad will fall. Apparently recruits are pouring in for the Iraqi Army, and while it will probably take heavy casualties, I think Baghdad is a holy enough city it will hold, even if Maliki has to relocate to Basra for safety. If the Iraqi Army and the Peshmerga can cooperate, they'll definitely hold ISIL off, and if they get foreign air support, they might even be able to roll them back some (though likely at high cost).

[Gauthier]

That's what you get when you brilliantly ditch American-trained Sunni military personnel in favor of your favorite Shiite goon squads to patrol the region and add to the sense of alienation the Sunnis feel to the point they root for ISIS.

[Maroza]

This.

I hope the powers in the region (including the United States) would be willing to temporarily set aside their differences (if only in regards to ISIL/ISIS) to deal with what has arguably become the greatest threat to the region's stability.

I also wondered why they haven't tried targetting their source of revenue: The oil and gas fields (especially in eastern Syria).

It really has gotten out of control to the point were ISIL/ISIS is starting to become better equiped than the Syrian army.

I've read several articles that say Iran is considering reaching out to the US for bilateral cooperation on the subject, which means the potential collapse of Iraq may also represent a positive turning point in American-Iranian relations. Not sure how I feel about that. :/

Nothing gets two sides to get their heads out of their asses and working together like a mutual enemy.

[Geilinor]

That's what you get when you brilliantly ditch American-trained Sunni military personnel in favor of your favorite Shiite goon squads to patrol the reason and add to the sense of alienation the Sunnis feel to the point they root for ISIS.

And according to the article Rio Cana posted, the Kurds are just waiting for Iraq to go down so they can get their own state. Iraq is fucked.

[Gauthier]

That's what you get when you brilliantly ditch American-trained Sunni military personnel in favor of your favorite Shiite goon squads to patrol the reason and add to the sense of alienation the Sunnis feel to the point they root for ISIS.

And according to the article Rio Cana posted, the Kurds are just waiting for Iraq to go down so they can get their own state. Iraq is fucked.

Which will translate to FOXNewsese as "That Ineffective Tyrant Nigger Obama Let the Terrorists Win Like the Closet Muslim We Knew He Was All Along".

[New Laikland]

Why isn't Iraq a parking lot yet?