Iraq cluster

[Sirkarl101]

Now that we are pulling out of Iraq. It now appears a new trading partnership is being set up between them and Iran. Kind of screws up the sanctions. Well one of those oops our leadership have been known to create. It sickens me... What do you think we should do if Iraq and Iran become chummy?

 

[Dr.Drock]

Bush and Obama both love(d) the Iraqi PM Nouri Al-Maliki despite his many connections to Iran and Hezbollah, why? Because he's a good puppet for now.

 

[LibertyForAll]

Now that we are pulling out of Iraq. It now appears a new trading partnership is being set up between them and Iran. Kind of screws up the sanctions. Well one of those oops our leadership have been known to create. It sickens me... What do you think we should do if Iraq and Iran become chummy?

I think we should mind our own business. They are sovereign nations and have the right to trade with whoever they choose. Iraq isn't going to sell Iran nuclear weapons because they don't have any. We would never be able to guarantee that a puppet regime stayed in power unless we stayed there indefinitely. We are not pulling out anyway, not altogether, since there will be an embassy with 17000 troops in it.

 

[paulitician]

It all works out perfectly for the Military Industrial Complex. There will be much more War over there. That's the way the MIC always sets things up. Stay tuned.

 

[WillowTree]

Now that we are pulling out of Iraq. It now appears a new trading partnership is being set up between them and Iran. Kind of screws up the sanctions. Well one of those oops our leadership have been known to create. It sickens me... What do you think we should do if Iraq and Iran become chummy?

I think we should mind our own business. They are sovereign nations and have the right to trade with whoever they choose. Iraq isn't going to sell Iran nuclear weapons because they don't have any. We would never be able to guarantee that a puppet regime stayed in power unless we stayed there indefinitely. We are not pulling out anyway, not altogether, since there will be an embassy with 17000 troops in it.

yep, we need to get the hell outta there and close up that fancy embassy we the people done spent a billion dollars on. fuck them

 

[bitterlyclingin]

Now that we are pulling out of Iraq. It now appears a new trading partnership is being set up between them and Iran. Kind of screws up the sanctions. Well one of those oops our leadership have been known to create. It sickens me... What do you think we should do if Iraq and Iran become chummy?

What did we do to the 21,000 defenders of Iwo Jima?
"Freedom is not free", America gets weaker and poorer with each passing day, while Obama strengthens Islam's hands more each day and America inches ever closer to a Second Civil War.
After the Democrats did the same thing with Vietnam, the Navy pushed the helicopters off the decks of its carriers to make room for those South Vietnamese who chose to come with us instead of facing death or imprisonment by their North Vietnamese conquerors.
Obama is just carrying out Jeremiah Wrights edict of "Its not God bless America! Its God d@mn America!" to his fullest ability.
Its too bad we had to wait and endure these three horrific years of his presidency to find out just how much ill will, hatred, and animosity Barack Hussein harbored for America, instead of having had the media properly vet him, in advance, as the founders wrongly anticipated they would.

 

[paulitician]

The Military Industrial Complex has lots more Wars planned for us. They will always invent a Boogeyman for Americans to fear. It is very sad but it is what it is.

 

[Cowman]

Now that we are pulling out of Iraq. It now appears a new trading partnership is being set up between them and Iran. Kind of screws up the sanctions. Well one of those oops our leadership have been known to create. It sickens me... What do you think we should do if Iraq and Iran become chummy?

Kill more Iraqis?

 

[FA_Q2]

Now that we are pulling out of Iraq. It now appears a new trading partnership is being set up between them and Iran. Kind of screws up the sanctions. Well one of those oops our leadership have been known to create. It sickens me... What do you think we should do if Iraq and Iran become chummy?

I think we should mind our own business. They are sovereign nations and have the right to trade with whoever they choose. Iraq isn't going to sell Iran nuclear weapons because they don't have any. We would never be able to guarantee that a puppet regime stayed in power unless we stayed there indefinitely. We are not pulling out anyway, not altogether, since there will be an embassy with 17000 troops in it.

I find it laughable that we go over there in the name of 'freeing' them and then whine like idiots when they actually act as though they are free. If this is the rout they chose then so be it. It is there damn nation to do with as they please. Perhaps Americans will now understand why we do not need to be gallivanting around the world claiming that we are helping everyone.

 

[ekrem]

I find it laughable that we go over there in the name of 'freeing' them and then whine like idiots when they actually act as though they are free. If this is the rout they chose then so be it. It is there damn nation to do with as they please. Perhaps Americans will now understand why we do not need to be gallivanting around the world claiming that we are helping everyone.

When did Iraqis call for your help?

 

[konradv]

Now that we are pulling out of Iraq. It now appears a new trading partnership is being set up between them and Iran. Kind of screws up the sanctions. Well one of those oops our leadership have been known to create. It sickens me... What do you think we should do if Iraq and Iran become chummy?

I think we should mind our own business. They are sovereign nations and have the right to trade with whoever they choose. Iraq isn't going to sell Iran nuclear weapons because they don't have any. We would never be able to guarantee that a puppet regime stayed in power unless we stayed there indefinitely. We are not pulling out anyway, not altogether, since there will be an embassy with 17000 troops in it.

I find it laughable that we go over there in the name of 'freeing' them and then whine like idiots when they actually act as though they are free. If this is the rout they chose then so be it. It is there damn nation to do with as they please. Perhaps Americans will now understand why we do not need to be gallivanting around the world claiming that we are helping everyone.

I agree. If we're for democracy, we should be for democracy and not harbor the anti-democratic sentiments that led us into Vietnam.

 

[FA_Q2]

I find it laughable that we go over there in the name of 'freeing' them and then whine like idiots when they actually act as though they are free. If this is the rout they chose then so be it. It is there damn nation to do with as they please. Perhaps Americans will now understand why we do not need to be gallivanting around the world claiming that we are helping everyone.

When did Iraqis call for your help?

Re-read my post and, nope never claimed that they did...

Maybe you should try reading that again.

 

[waltky]

In this economy where we gonna find jobs for the returning troops and what's gonna happen in Iraq once we're gone?...

US Troops Leave Iraq with Job Concerns
Thursday 15th December, 2011 - For American troops leaving Iraq this month, there is a sense of relief but also worry about returning to civilian life and searching for jobs in a weak U.S. economy. U.S. troops along the Iraq-Kuwait border, where thousands have been transiting on their way home are wondering about their future.

Staff Sergeant Brett Bolton, an Air Force truck driver who has served for six years, is now looking at life beyond his deployment in the Iraq war. "First thing, it would be just to get a secure job and then I'd like to start a family, me and my wife," he says. Jobs in the trucking industry at home are scarce. Staying in the military may not be an option, either.

Bolton is with the 387th Expeditionary Logistics Squadron, a unit created for this war. Clearing troops and equipment from Iraq is the squadron's last mission before it is permanently deactivated. Most members will go back to military jobs in the U.S., but their futures are uncertain in the face of coming defense cuts.

For many troops, the joy of going home is tempered by worries about finding a job. "Right now the unemployment rate nationwide is through the roof," Bolton says. "I've done my six years. I feel like I've done enough and I want to go back to the civilian world, but right now it's not looking too good for me."

The Air Force and other branches of the U.S. military have programs to help troops prepare for their job hunts and find ways to apply their wartime skills in civilian settings. The troops' battle now is to start new lives in a troubled economy at home. They have sacrificed for their country and hope their country will now deliver to them. The U.S. government has made jobs for veterans a priority issue.

Source

See also:

Uncertainty in Iraq as US army ends mission
Dec. 15`11: Nation faces severe challenges, says Panetta

The US military officially declared an end to its mission in Iraq today even as violence continues to plague the country and the Muslim world remains distrustful of American power. In a fortified concrete courtyard at the airport in Baghdad, US defence secretary Leon E. Panetta thanked the more than one million American service members who have served in Iraq for “the remarkable progress” made over the past nine years but acknowledged the severe challenges that face the struggling democracy. “Let me be clear: Iraq will be tested in the days ahead — by terrorism, and by those who would seek to divide, by economic and social issues, by the demands of democracy itself,” Panetta said. “Challenges remain, but the US will be there to stand by the Iraqi people as they navigate those challenges to build a stronger and more prosperous nation.”

The tenor of the farewell ceremony, officially called “Casing the Colours”, was likely to sound an uncertain trumpet for a war that was launched to rid Iraq of weapons of mass destruction it did not have and now ends without the sizeable, enduring American military presence for which many officers had hoped. The tone of the string of ceremonies culminating with the final withdrawal event today has been understated in keeping with an administration that campaigned to end an unpopular war it inherited. Although the ceremony today marked the end of the war, the military still has two bases in Iraq and roughly 4,000 troops, including several hundred that attended the ceremony. At the height of the war in 2007 there were 505 bases and over 150,000 troops.

According to military officials, the remaining troops are still being attacked on a daily basis, mainly by indirect fire attacks on the bases and road side bomb explosions against convoys heading south through Iraq to bases in Kuwait. Even after the last two bases are closed and the final American combat troops withdraw from Iraq by December 31 under rules of an agreement with the Baghdad government, a few hundred military personnel and Pentagon civilians will remain, working within the American embassy as part of an office of security cooperation to assist in arms sales and training. But negotiations could resume next year on whether additional American military personnel can return to further assist their Iraqi counterparts. Senior American military officers have made no secret that they see key gaps in Iraq’s ability to defend its sovereign soil and even to secure its oil platforms offshore in the Persian Gulf.

Air defences are seen as a critical gap in Iraqi capabilities, but American military officers also see significant shortcomings in Iraq’s ability to sustain a military, whether moving food and fuel or servicing the armoured vehicles it is inheriting from Americans or the jet-fighters it is buying, and has shortfalls in military engineers, artillery and intelligence, as well. The tenuous security atmosphere in Iraq was underscored by helicopters that hovered over the ceremony, scanning the ground for rocket attacks. Although there is far less violence across Iraq than at the height of the sectarian conflict in 2006 and 2007, but there are bombings on a nearly daily basis and Americans remain a target of Shia militants.

More Uncertainty in Iraq as US army ends mission

 

[waltky]

U.S. Loses Leverage in Iraq Now That Troops Are Out...

U.S. Embraces Low-Key Plan in Iraqi Crisis
December 24, 2011 : WASHINGTON — As Iraq erupted in recent days, Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. was in constant phone contact with the leaders of the country’s dueling sects. He called the Shiite prime minister and the Sunni speaker of the Parliament on Tuesday, and the Kurdish leader on Thursday, urging them to try to resolve the political crisis.

And for the United States, that is where the American intervention in Iraq officially stops. Sectarian violence and political turmoil in Iraq escalated within days of the United States military’s withdrawal, but officials said in interviews that President Obama had no intention of sending troops back into the country, even if it devolved into civil war. The United States, without troops on the ground or any direct influence over Iraq’s affairs, has lost much of its leverage there. And so the latest crisis, a descent into sectarian distrust and hostility that was punctuated by a bombing in Baghdad on Thursday that killed more than 60 people, is being treated in much the same way that the United States would treat any diplomatic emergency abroad.

Mr. Obama, his aides said, is adamant that the United States will not send troops back to Iraq. At Fort Bragg, N.C., on Dec. 14, he told returning troops that he had left Iraq in the hands of the Iraqi people, and in private conversations at the White House, he has told aides that the United States gave Iraqis an opportunity; what they do with that opportunity is up to them. Though the president has been heralding the end of the Iraq war as a victory, and a fulfillment of his campaign promise to bring American troops home, the sudden crisis could quickly become a political problem for Mr. Obama, foreign policy experts said.

“Right now, Iraq, along with getting Osama bin Laden, succeeding in Libya, and restoring the U.S. reputation in the world, is a clear plus for Obama,” said David Rothkopf, a former official in the administration of Bill Clinton and a national security expert. “He kept his promise and got out. But the story could turn on him very rapidly.” For instance, Mr. Rothkopf and other national security experts said, Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki of Iraq is swiftly adopting policies that are setting off deep divisions among Sunnis, Kurds and Shiites. If Iraq fragments, if Iran starts to assert more visible influence or if a civil war breaks out, “the president could be blamed,” Mr. Rothkopf said. “He would be remembered not for leaving Iraq but for how he left it.”

Already, Mr. Obama is coming under political fire. Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, said that Mr. Obama’s decision to pull American troops out had “unraveled.” Appearing on CBS News on Thursday, Mr. McCain said that “we are paying a very heavy price in Baghdad because of our failure to have a residual force there,” adding that while he was disturbed by what had happened in the past week, he was not surprised. Administration officials, for their part, countered that it was hard to see how American troops could have prevented either the political crisis or the coordinated attacks in Iraq.

MORE

See also:


Iraqi vice president warns of sectarian violence
Sun, Dec 25, 2011 - ONE-MAN SHOW: Minority Sunnis fear that the Shiite majority is depriving them of any say, while the Shiites suspect Sunnis of fomenting terrorism and insurrection

Iraq’s Sunni vice president, wanted for allegedly running a hit squad in Iraq, has accused Shiite Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al--Maliki of waging a campaign against Sunnis and pushing the country toward sectarian war. In an interview on Friday, Iraqi Vice President Tariq al-Hashemi said al-Maliki wants to get rid of all political rivals and run Iraq like a “one-man show.” The comments by Iraq’s -highest-level Sunni political figure reflect mounting sectarian tensions surrounding the confrontation between him and the prime minister that have hiked fears Iraq could be thrown into new violence following the exit of US troops.

The political crisis taps into the resentments that have remained raw in the country despite years of effort to overcome them, with minority Sunnis fearing the Shiite majority is squeezing them out of any political say, and Shiites suspecting Sunnis of links to -insurgency and terrorism. “He’s pushing the things to a catastrophe. And I’m not sure what’s going to happen after that,” al--Hashemi, who denies the accusations, said of the prime minister. He spoke at a guesthouse of Iraqi President Jalal Talabani in the mountains overlooking the northern Kurdish city of Sulaimaniyah, 260km northeast of Baghdad. Al-Hashemi arrived here last Sunday with a small suitcase and two suits to discuss the growing conflict with al-Maliki’s government.

However, what was supposed to be a two-day trip has stretched nearly a week after the Iraqi government on Monday issued an arrest warrant against him on what he says are trumped-up charges. He has refused to go back to Baghdad, where he says he cannot get a fair trial. The central government’s security forces do not operate in the northern autonomous Kurdish zone, so he is safe from arrest there. The Iraqi government says al-Hashemi orchestrated a campaign of assassinations carried out by his bodyguards. Earlier this week, they aired televised confessions of the bodyguards detailing how al--Hashemi gave them money for the hits. The confessions have aired repeatedly since then, including on state TV, when al-Hashemi earlier this week held a press conference defending himself.

Fears the situation could spiral out of control were heightened by devastating bombings that tore through mostly Shiite neighborhoods of Baghdad on Thursday and killed at least 69 people. Many fear Iraq could fall back into the vicious sectarian bloodshed that reached its height in 2006 and 2007 and nearly threw the country into civil war. Al-Hashemi is one of the leaders of the Iraqiya party, a Sunni-backed political bloc that has constantly clashed with al-Maliki’s Shiite coalition and accused him of hoarding power. Al-Maliki is also seeking a vote of no-confidence against the Sunni Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq. Security forces have also launched a wave of arrests against former members of the Sunni-dominated Baath Party, which ruled Iraq under former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein. In Sunnis’ eyes, the moves show al-Maliki is out to get them. “Definitely, he is going to concentrate on the Sunni community because they are the society, the community of Tariq al-Hashemi, so they are going to suffer,” the vice president said.

MORE

 

[waltky]

Sectarian violence raises its ugly head again...

Civil war fears rise as 72 killed in Iraq bombings
Thursday 5th January, 2012 - At least 72 people died in coordinated bomb attacks on Shiite pilgrims and neighbourhoods in Iraq yesterday on the bloodiest day since US forces withdrew from the country.

Explosions struck two Shiite areas in Baghdad early in the morning, killing at least 27. A few hours later, 45 died in a suicide attack on pilgrims heading for Karbala. Since American troops left on December 18 there has been a wave of bombings, mostly targeting Shiites, threatening to drag Iraq back towards the sectarian conflict that ravaged the country after the US-led invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein. The situation has been exacerbated by a political crisis pitting politicians from the Shiite majority who dominate the government against the Sunni minority, who reigned supreme under the dictatorship of Saddam. There was no claim of responsibility for the bloodshed but the bombings carried the hallmarks of Sunni insurgents linked to al Qaeda.

The attacks began in Baghdad with the explosion of a bomb attached to a motorcycle near a bus stop where labourers gather to look for work in the Shiite Sadr City neighbourhood. That attack was followed by the explosion of a roadside bomb. Police found a third bomb nearby and defused it. Less than two hours later, two explosions went off simultaneously in the Shiite neighbourhood of Kazimiyah in the north of the capital. “I saw too much blood flood on to streets and bodies thrown to the side of the road,” said Abo Faris, who owns a shop near one of the bomb sites in Kazimiyah. “They targeted a crowded Shia place. I’m sure now al Qaeda is strong and they can attack any day, any time.”

The attack on the pilgrims took place near Nasiriyah, about 320 kilometres south-east of Baghdad, in the run-up to Arbaeen, a Shiite holy day marking the end of 40 days of mourning that follow the anniversary of the death of Imam Hussein. During this time, Shiite pilgrims from across Iraq make their way to Karbala, south of Baghdad. Ahmed Abdel Saheb Khaqani, director of the Hussein General Hospital in Nasiriyah, where the dead and injured were taken, said two suicide bombers wearing explosive belts blew themselves up and a bomb hidden by the road also exploded. Baghdad military spokesman Maj Gen Qassim Al Moussawi said the aim of the attacks was “to create turmoil among the Iraqi people”. He said it was too early to say who was behind them.

The bombings were the deadliest in Baghdad since December 22, when a series of explosions killed 69 people in mostly Shiite neighbourhoods. An al Qaeda front group in Iraq claimed responsibility. The increased violence comes as sectarian tensions have heightened after the Shiite prime minister Nouri Al Maliki’s government issued an arrest warrant for the country’s top Sunni politician last month. Tariq Al Hashemi, the vice president, is in Iraq’s semiautonomous Kurdish region in the north, out of reach of state security forces. Iraqi leaders feared a resurgence of Sunni and Shiite militants and an increase in violence after the US pullout, a fear that is coming to be realised.

MORE

 

[JStone]

Bush and Obama both love(d) the Iraqi PM Nouri Al-Maliki despite his many connections to Iran and Hezbollah, why? Because he's a good puppet for now.

Whatevuh, Kissinger.