Are We Ready For The Fall Of Baghdad?- The US Embassy?

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Will Obama let ISIS burn the American flag and raise the black flag of death at the US Embassy?

-Geaux

A month ago, ISIS’s advance looked unstoppable. Now it’s been stopped.

Watching the news, you could be forgiven for thinking that ISIS is an unstoppable juggernaut, sweeping Iraq and Syria in an unending, unstoppable, terrible blitzkrieg.

But you'd be wrong. The truth is that ISIS's momentum is stalled: in both Iraq and Syria, the group is being beaten back at key points. There are initial signs — uncertain, sketchy, but hopeful — that the group is hurting more than you may think, and has stalled out in the war it was for so long winning. ISIS isn't close to being destroyed. But they are reeling.

A month ago ISIS s advance looked unstoppable. Now it s been stopped. - Vox

What's sad and telling is that there are some on the right who are actually disappointed by this.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I say hitting them from air and supporting Kurdish and Iraq forces is the right move for now. After the midterms, I think we're going to see increasing numbers of US advisers moving into Iraq. If that doesn't do it then I think we will start sending US Special Forces, slowly at first but increasing over the coming months. Australia has agreed to send 200 special forces troops to fight along side Iraqi troops. The UK and a dozen other countries have committed a few troops and air support, but you can bet that will increase once the US starts putting some boots on the ground. These countries are not going to make any real commitment until the US does.

Let's hope you're wrong.

American ground forces in any capacity is unwarranted, including 'advisers.' The air strikes and arming of those fighting ISIS is appropriate, but stabilizing Iraq is far too difficult and complex than just defeating ISIS. Once ISIS is gone another Sunni insurgency will manifest if they perceive themselves being oppressed by Baghdad.

The many factions in conflict in Iraq aren't worth Americans dying for.

 

[JakeStarkey]

You are right, flopper. But . . . if the Kurdish and the Arab ground forces can't hold the line, then we let the ME fold. We don't belong there if the Arabs, Kurds, Turks, and Persians won't fight to hold their on.

And in the GOP we must purge any of the haters who are admirers of Putin and Russia at the expense of America.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

BK 10087905

his ROE's (rules of engagement) dictate US Troop CAN NOT FIRE UNLESS FIRED UPON.

I don't know how BullKurtzUSMC explains drone strikes against Taliban even if they are sound asleep with visions of sugarplums dancing in their heads.

And would BullKurtzUSMC cite the ROE from Obama specifically that changed them to dictate US Troop CAN NOT FIRE UNLESS FIRED UPON.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

American ground forces in any capacity is unwarranted, including 'advisers.'

It was entirely because of the disarray and incompetence of the Maliki headed ISF and police that made sending advisers into Iraq the most necessary strategic first move by Obama to begin the military task of STOPPING the IS terrorists from continuing their killing and stealing spree further across Iraq into Kurdish and Shiite territory that Maliki's failures left vulnerable.

Simultaneous with sending advisers in Obama's stated diplomatic goal was to see the Iraqis deny Maliki another term in power.

If you agree with the above please let me know. And if not please let me know why not.

 

[BullKurtz]

If that were true why did General Petraeus say in 2010 ttat the momentum the Taliban had the previous several years was reversed.

That means the Taliban had free rein prior to 2019, not the other way around.

You don't link any of these supposed quotes and don't have a clue about the context of events in 2010. AQ was beaten in Iraq in 2009.....fighters who escaped Afghanistan, went to Iraq, and then came back. Petraeus had his own problems going on (cheating on his wife) and with no war to fight, moved to the CIA. Once again, please refrain from commenting on my posts.....this back and forth has moved from tiresome to annoying. I've explained why the Taliban is surging and it all has to do with the coward in the WH not trusting his generals and preferring to do nothing and thus leaving his mess to the next president same as Clinturd did.

 

[BullKurtz]

BK 10087905

his ROE's (rules of engagement) dictate US Troop CAN NOT FIRE UNLESS FIRED UPON.

I don't know how BullKurtzUSMC explains drone strikes against Taliban even if they are sound asleep with visions of sugarplums dancing in their heads.

And would BullKurtzUSMC cite the ROE from Obama specifically that changed them to dictate US Troop CAN NOT FIRE UNLESS FIRED UPON.

Hey asshole...most of the drone strikes have been aimed at PAKISTANI taliban for ISI cooperation in moving support materiel through the mountains to Afghanistan. Further, you didn't know what an ROE was until I told you and maybe if you looked somewhere other than leftist dogshit sites, you'd find out how the president dictated the new chickenshit ROEs. And that's it....you get no further corrections from me.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

BK 10091625

Further, you didn't know what an ROE was until I told you..

You have just confirmed that you will state an argument that not only is not true but it is quite obvious that there is no way that you could know whether or not it could be true. That does say much for your commitment to honest debate and discussion.

I know that your comment that I cited about ROE being dictated by Obama is not true. The fact that you cannot provide the cite U asked for shows you didnt have one and cannot find one.

But I'll give you another chance.

Can you cite the ROE from Obama specifically that changed them to dictate that US Troops CAN NOT FIRE UNLESS FIRED UPON?

Enough with your foul mouth. How about backing up you claim?

 

[BullKurtz]

Here ya go asshole...many to choose from...now SCRAM.

Tighter rules of engagement contributed to US casualty rate in Afghanistan report RT USA

 

[Flopper]

I say hitting them from air and supporting Kurdish and Iraq forces is the right move for now. After the midterms, I think we're going to see increasing numbers of US advisers moving into Iraq. If that doesn't do it then I think we will start sending US Special Forces, slowly at first but increasing over the coming months. Australia has agreed to send 200 special forces troops to fight along side Iraqi troops. The UK and a dozen other countries have committed a few troops and air support, but you can bet that will increase once the US starts putting some boots on the ground. These countries are not going to make any real commitment until the US does.

Let's hope you're wrong.

American ground forces in any capacity is unwarranted, including 'advisers.' The air strikes and arming of those fighting ISIS is appropriate, but stabilizing Iraq is far too difficult and complex than just defeating ISIS. Once ISIS is gone another Sunni insurgency will manifest if they perceive themselves being oppressed by Baghdad.

The many factions in conflict in Iraq aren't worth Americans dying for.

Reading the CNN article in the link below, I think the decision to send more advisers into Iraq has already been made. Hopefully, we won't have to send in special forces, but if it appears Iraq is going to fall to ISIS, I think we will. For the US to sit on the sidelines and watch Iraq and possibly Syria fall to ISIS would be a disaster, both political for Democrats in 2016 and for the US efforts to fight terrorism.

U.S. readying plan for advisers to Anbar - CNN.com

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I say hitting them from air and supporting Kurdish and Iraq forces is the right move for now. After the midterms, I think we're going to see increasing numbers of US advisers moving into Iraq. If that doesn't do it then I think we will start sending US Special Forces, slowly at first but increasing over the coming months. Australia has agreed to send 200 special forces troops to fight along side Iraqi troops. The UK and a dozen other countries have committed a few troops and air support, but you can bet that will increase once the US starts putting some boots on the ground. These countries are not going to make any real commitment until the US does.

Let's hope you're wrong.

American ground forces in any capacity is unwarranted, including 'advisers.' The air strikes and arming of those fighting ISIS is appropriate, but stabilizing Iraq is far too difficult and complex than just defeating ISIS. Once ISIS is gone another Sunni insurgency will manifest if they perceive themselves being oppressed by Baghdad.

The many factions in conflict in Iraq aren't worth Americans dying for.

Reading the CNN article in the link below, I think the decision to send more advisers into Iraq has already been made. Hopefully, we won't have to send in special forces, but if it appears Iraq is going to fall to ISIS, I think we will. For the US to sit on the sidelines and watch Iraq and possibly Syria fall to ISIS would be a disaster, both political for Democrats in 2016 and for the US efforts to fight terrorism.

U.S. readying plan for advisers to Anbar - CNN.com

Of paramount importance is that Americans never again pointlessly fight and die in a region incapable of self-governance, where the American sacrifice of blood and treasure will purchase neither peace nor stability, and where that sacrifice is met with contempt and disregard on the part of the people for whom that sacrifice was made.

Syria and Iraq are not France in 1944, ISIS is not the Nazis; if ISIS is stopped another similar militant Sunni insurgency will reconstitute once the Americans leave, which means we will be forever returning to Iraq to prop up an untenable and failed 'state,' or we will forever remain in Iraq with Americans pointlessly fighting and dying.

The American Century has been over for decades, it's time we realize that.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

BK 10091625

most of the drone strikes have been aimed at PAKISTANI taliban for ISI cooperation in moving support materiel through the mountains to Afghanistan

How do you say 'most of...'? Afghan Taliban leaders hide and train and organize attacks from the lawless territories in Pakistan. They are targeted when they are not shooting at US troops and they are killed. So you are still wrong and who cares whether Obama orders drone strikes to kill Pakistani Taliban or Afghanistan Taliban? There is no ROE that stops it.






BK 10091625

... maybe if you looked somewhere other than leftist dogshit sites, you'd find out how the president dictated the new chickenshit ROEs.

I read the Press release on new ROE for ISAF and NATO forces in early 2009 from General Stanley McChrystal when it was issued. Unfortunately for you it does not state what you claim it does.

 

[Flopper]

American ground forces in any capacity is unwarranted, including 'advisers.'

It was entirely because of the disarray and incompetence of the Maliki headed ISF and police that made sending advisers into Iraq the most necessary strategic first move by Obama to begin the military task of STOPPING the IS terrorists from continuing their killing and stealing spree further across Iraq into Kurdish and Shiite territory that Maliki's failures left vulnerable.

Simultaneous with sending advisers in Obama's stated diplomatic goal was to see the Iraqis deny Maliki another term in power.

If you agree with the above please let me know. And if not please let me know why not.

I agree that sending in advisers is a good move. The US military commands the respect of the Iraqi military leadership. Having more US advisers on the ground to coordinate US air support with ground forces is a move in the right direction. This will also provide feedback to both US and Iraqi leadership.

The Iraqi army is inexperience, lacks leadership, and is fragmented in their loyalty to the central government. .Malliki's replacement Haider al-Abadi is addressing some of the Sunnis’ grievances which Maliki has ignored and has done some reorganization of military which included firing some generals commanding units that refuse to fight.

 

[BullKurtz]

Of paramount importance is that Americans never again pointlessly fight and die in a region incapable of self-governance, where the American sacrifice of blood and treasure will purchase neither peace nor stability, and where that sacrifice is met with contempt and disregard on the part of the people for whom that sacrifice was made.

Syria and Iraq are not France in 1944, ISIS is not the Nazis; if ISIS is stopped another similar militant Sunni insurgency will reconstitute once the Americans leave, which means we will be forever returning to Iraq to prop up an untenable and failed 'state,' or we will forever remain in Iraq with Americans pointlessly fighting and dying.

The American Century has been over for decades, it's time we realize that.

Ah so Afghan Pashtun and Iraqi arabs aren't capable of self-rule? Spoken like a true RACIST....congrats!

You might recall that we gave the taliban notice that we wanted bin-Laden or we would come get him, The taliban refused believing Bush was the same kind of spineless coward Clinton was. They found out different.

Don't know which century you live in but the last two have been American centuries and this one will be too when we drill and use our own oil, pay off our debt, and put our people back to work.....impossible with a stinking Rat in the White House.

 

[Flopper]

You are right, flopper. But . . . if the Kurdish and the Arab ground forces can't hold the line, then we let the ME fold. We don't belong there if the Arabs, Kurds, Turks, and Persians won't fight to hold their on.

And in the GOP we must purge any of the haters who are admirers of Putin and Russia at the expense of America.

The top US military assessment of the Iraqi army is 26 of the 50 army brigades are capable of standing up to ISIS fighters. This is more than enough ground forces to defeat ISIS. What is needed is leadership from the top and coordination. US military advisers can provide much of the coordination needed but the leadership has come from the Iraqi command.

Top general says half of Iraqi army incapable of working with US against ISIS Fox News

 

[whutTHEYsay]

BK 10091587

You don't link any of these supposed quotes

Here is a link to the Petraeus quote when he said ""The momentum that the Taliban have established over the course of recent years has been reversed in many areas and will be reversed in the other areas as well."


Petraeus Says TalibanMomentum 'Reversed' | Fox News
World News International Breaking News Headlines Video Fox News2010/08/23/petraeus-declares...
Aug 23, 2010 · Gen. David Petraeus, the commander of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan, said in an interview Monday ...

Petraeus Says Taliban Momentum 'Reversed'
Published August 23, 2010
FoxNews.com
Petraeus Says Taliban Momentum Reversed Fox News

You are wrong again.

 

[BullKurtz]

BK 10091587

You don't link any of these supposed quotes

Here is a link to the Petraeus quote when he said ""The momentum that the Taliban have established over the course of recent years has been reversed in many areas and will be reversed in the other areas as well."


Petraeus Says TalibanMomentum 'Reversed' | Fox News
World News International Breaking News Headlines Video Fox News2010/08/23/petraeus-declares...
Aug 23, 2010 · Gen. David Petraeus, the commander of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan, said in an interview Monday ...

Petraeus Says Taliban Momentum 'Reversed'
Published August 23, 2010
FoxNews.com
Petraeus Says Taliban Momentum Reversed Fox News

You are wrong again.

Go play with your toys, sonny.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Ah so Afghan Pashtun and Iraqi arabs aren't capable of self-rule

I am quite certain they can, yet you call me an asshole for stating facts. So what's up with that?

 

[whutTHEYsay]

BK 10092706

Go play with your toys, sonny

So Petraeus said what I said he said and you choose to keep runnin'. You are quite the toy.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

The top US military assessment of the Iraqi army is 26 of the 50 army brigades are capable of standing up to ISIS fighters. This is more than enough ground forces to defeat ISIS.

That is a most relevant stat that must be emphasized. But it was very obvious that it was not the entire Iraqi military that ran when the IS terrorists launched the assault last June. Yet the news media in the US fed the impression that the entire Iraqi army was on the run.