But when did the US leave Iraq? 2011/2012 I think? Doesn't look like they've left it in a very stable placeThey've only been around a year or two.
ISIS in Iraq and Syria
- Thread starter Suli
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) was joined by comedian Ali Woods to look back at the best and worst moments of a rollercoaster season with the annual United Hour Awards.
Has Ten Hag been sacked yet? We're not sure and we hope not, but it's looking more likely as the days pass.
Who should replace him and why is it taking so long to make a decision?
It was relatively stable when the US left in 2011. Trouble is, the Iraqis didn't have a sense of national Unity between the Shi'a government, Sunni minority, and increasingly autonomous minded Kurds. The lack of unity and general mismanagement within the government allowed Al-Qaeda/ISIS back into the game.
I remember reading an article which blamed a guy called Paul Bremer and it was something about how the US didn't leave a strong Iraqi military when they left. Will need to look it up as I can't remember what the article was about fully. The US surely has to take a large portion of blame for the mess in Iraq right now though...you would have thought they would have planned their leaving much better
Those are two separate situations. Bremer disbanded the old Saddam era military and commissioned a new one to be trained by the US to avoid old loyalties. That was obviously a mistake since it put a lot of qualified military officers out of work, who were then radicalized by Al-Qaeda in Iraq and later ISIS. That could've been mitigated more recently by a more inclusive Iraqi government who reached out to Sunnis.
Yeah ISIS has a lot of the old Baath Party generals now don't they...you would just think if you are going to invade a country and topple the government you would at least think about whats going to happen with old party leaders and to prevent something from going wrong again. I remember reading about how the US had all sorts of plans to ensure that Germany and Japan didn't fall back to its old ways once they left but it doesn't seem like Bush really put that much thought into the future of Iraq once the war was over.
Would the West have been better off with Saddam still in power though?
Bush clearly didn't think it out properly and was replaced by someone who is an anti-interventionist and wanted to bring all US troops home. Bush, Cheney, Bremer, Wolfowitz and that mob have a lot to answer for.
Short term yes, as Saddam would've repelled AQ and ISIS, who probably wouldn't exist without the botched invasion of Iraq. Long term, hard to say as Saddam was an unpredictable guy and his sons were even crazier. If he passed on and his sons took over, it would've meant instability for another 20-30 years.
It's pretty insane to think how the world would probably be a better place with.....Saddam Hussain. The west would definitely be a lot safer with no ISIS and no islamic lunatics traveling to Iraq/Syria and possibly traveling back to their european countries to commit terrorism.
Trouble is, Saddam would still be in charge but Syria would be in turmoil. There's nothing to say he wouldn't have attempted something in Syria or short of that, that Al-Qaeda wouldn't have set up camp there much like ISIS have. The Syrian civil war happened because of Assad's dictatorship, which is independent of the invasion of Iraq.
Didn't the US arm those Syrian rebels as well? I'm not sure about the situation exactly but wouldn't have Assad probably have faired a lot better without the rebels being armed by the US and without having ISIS roll in during the conflict. The Saudi's hated Saddam too I think(not sure) so they probably wouldn't have been giving all the support to the rebel/terrorist groups either if it was playing into Saddam's hands in getting control of Syria too. Too many what if's
There was a bit of that but the fundamental reasons why the Syrian civil war is taking place are domestic and related to the Assad regimes authoritarian ways.
There are no what ifs. The US government carries the biggest responsibility for that mess in the Middle East. It was always bad, but they made it million times worse. All that idiocy, from invading Iraq to sponsoring those Syrian "freedom fighters", they just can't help themselves.Didn't the US arm those Syrian rebels as well? I'm not sure about the situation exactly but wouldn't have Assad probably have faired a lot better without the rebels being armed by the US and without having ISIS roll in during the conflict. The Saudi's hated Saddam too I think(not sure) so they probably wouldn't have been giving all the support to the rebel/terrorist groups either if it was playing into Saddam's hands in getting control of Syria too. Too many what if's
http://www.spiegel.de/international...y-life-under-the-islamic-state-a-1041317.html
Must-read, and horrifying.
Must-read, and horrifying.
Definitely, one that made me cry. These guy are basically Nazi's mixed with religious fervor to excuse every horrifying thing they do.
IDF going gung ho into Sinai and Syria probably isn't such a bad idea at this point. Not a big fan of the Israelis, but this might just be an occasion where their ruthlessness could be of some use.
Israel going into Sinai or Syria would make things ten times worse. Fortunately I believe the Israelis have learned the lesson of their 1982 Lebanese adventure.
Disagree, vehemently.
Saddam will have passed the mantle on to most likely Qusay, but there's no knowing if he would have survived his tenure.
What happened instead has probably Iraq destablised for another 20 years.
Last edited:
Nothing will happen if Israel pass into the Sinai.
Egypt will do feck all and Al-Sisi will probably fetch them hot towels himself. ISIS will be all like "these aren't Muslims, how can we kill them?!" and scurry back to beheading women and children who cannot defend themselves. All the other Arab countries won't care, the Turks will kick up a fuss but do feck all about it as they usually do and Iran wil piss themselves with laughter.
Its no longer 1973.
Egypt will do feck all and Al-Sisi will probably fetch them hot towels himself. ISIS will be all like "these aren't Muslims, how can we kill them?!" and scurry back to beheading women and children who cannot defend themselves. All the other Arab countries won't care, the Turks will kick up a fuss but do feck all about it as they usually do and Iran wil piss themselves with laughter.
Its no longer 1973.
Last edited:
Really man why keep talking about Morsi? the guy is in prison most likely going to die there, Al-Sisi is even worse.
Al-Sisi must be the best actor to come out of Egypt ever, I hate the guy more than I hate any Arab leader even though I hate them all.Ahh I meant to say Al-Sisi, my bad.
No idea why I said Morsi
So the West standing and watching one of the few times a proper military intervention would be justified. This after beeing one of the main reasons for this chaos. Congratulations. Also I don't think there can be any question whatsoever that the west AND the middle east would have been off with Saddam still in regime.
No such thing as an Arab 'leader'. They're all pretenders with a tail between their legs.
Trying to force countries that are clearly not ready yet into western democracy with armed force was alwas going to be a brilliant idea...
I think Arabs killing each other is much more fun, believe it or not.
Even better, there are some on here (albeit not all Westerners) expecting Israel to clear the mess for them. Weird stuff.
@Godfather
ISIS actively want Western boots on the ground so they can ramp up their fervor and support ten-fold. To create a caliphate they need more behind them then they have, and it's easy to bastardise the other and at the moment a clearly defined, already hated other isn't present and that's the way we should keep it.
ISIS actively want Western boots on the ground so they can ramp up their fervor and support ten-fold. To create a caliphate they need more behind them then they have, and it's easy to bastardise the other and at the moment a clearly defined, already hated other isn't present and that's the way we should keep it.
I undestand where you are coming from but what to do with them? Just let them be and let them murder pretty much everybody different to their believes? I'm not sure this can be the solution. It should have been the solution in the past. Way too often the west intervened when there was absolutley no need to. But it seems they don't deem an intervention as profitable enough this time.
If we did launch a ground invasion, they would just dissolve, no way they want to fight western ground forces. I genuinely don't know what to do with them but it's not as if it's a new problem they've just got a new name, we haven't fixed it before and we won't fix it now.
I'm not sure there is a solution - certainly not a simple one - cutting off funding would be a good start and one that may not give the obvious call to arms / mass suicide attacks on troops that a boots on the ground policy would - but that would require letting the situation carry on for a while and probably deteriorate before it could improve - and if they do succeed in triggering a more widespread sunni vs shia conflict and you start to see iran and saudi get involved then all bets are off as to how messed up it could all get.
A good documentary although a bit old about the life in Raqqa
45 of the vermin poisoned during a Ramadan meal in Mosul
They're soon learning that taking over a city is the easy part, maintaining an unpopular occupation on the other hand..
They're soon learning that taking over a city is the easy part, maintaining an unpopular occupation on the other hand..
A lot more of them need to be killed before they start fleeing the cities.45 of the vermin poisoned during a Ramadan meal in Mosul
They're soon learning that taking over a city is the easy part, maintaining an unpopular occupation on the other hand..
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Whoops!
Theyll pin in it on some poor innocent soul, parade him in front of the townsfolk as a PR stunt and inflict a very public and brutal death as to ward off copycats.45 of the vermin poisoned during a Ramadan meal in Mosul
They're soon learning that taking over a city is the easy part, maintaining an unpopular occupation on the other hand..
Poor bastard
Supposedly, IS banned Eid prayers in Mosul.
These guys clearly aren't Muslim, and as a consequence should kill themselves (if they follow their own ideology).
Alleged Islamic group ban Islamic custom of praying on most holy Islamic day. Proceeds to make a spectacle of torturing and executing Muslim people in the name of Islam instead.
Seem like a legit bunch.
Seem like a legit bunch.
That obama clip is going to be on all the conspiracy sites and is probably being edited into some illuminati montage as I type this.
It'd actually be laughable if it wasn't so pathetic.