- Thread starter
- #81
If it's a stupid idea, it's YOUR stupid idea. You posted it. Nobody's is talking about runnnig air cover for Iranian troops. The air strikes are on behalf of the American people, to protect them from the nuclear ANNIHILATION that would result, if/whenever ISIS were to acquire control over Iraq, its massive oil reserves, its massive wealth, and thereby a nuclear arsenal.
Wow. What a bizarre fantasy.
The Sunni crazy group is not getting control of Iraq and its non existent nuclear capacity.
Upon what do you base that statement ? Some particular set of facts, or pure speculation ?
After five days of siege and foreboding, the citizens of Baghdad breathed easier on Saturday. Old-world tea houses were once again brimming. So were new militia recruitment centres, where would-be fighters signed up to defend the capital.
The city's collective relief stemmed from three live television addresses, only one of them made by an Iraqi. On Friday, President Barack Obama said enough to convince most that he would soon send US jets to deal with the insurgents at the gates. Hours later the Iranian president, Hassan Rouhani, said an alarmed Iran, which is overwhelmingly Shia, would send whatever it took to stem the insurgent Sunni tide. The alliance of common interests was perceived as a rebuff to Isis (the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant), a jihadist group so hardline it was disowned by al-Qaida. Isis has been rampaging through the country, pledging to rewrite the region's borders.
But it was a religious cleric who succeeded in steeling Iraqis for a fightback. The call to arms by the highest Shia authority in the land, Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, mobilized in less than one day around a division of militia men who, unlike the military, will not run from a fight with the insurgents.
Shia militia: 'Isis will not take Baghdad' | World news | The Observer