Jump to content

Theme© by Fisana
 

Fool Moon
Photo
* * * * * 2 votes

Bush43 Gave Iraq to Iran and General Suleimani now holds the keys

qassim suleimani iraq iran qods force

284 replies to this topic

#16 mmoghand

mmoghand

    member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 702 posts

Posted 17 July 2014 - 08:33 AM

I am not sure that isis is al Qaeda.

al Qaeda in Iraq was the proper title. That matched their own nomenclature in Arabic, plus Pentagon usage. Our General Ordierno went public in 2010 with a big haul of AQI men. He said "we've either picked up or killed 34 out of the top 42 al Qaeda in Iraq leaders," implying that AQI was in deep trouble. But subsequently 8 major prison breaks freed the most of AQI personnel and AQI morphed to ISIS/ISIL with its main operation up in central Syria. Between MENA Sunni contributions, oil money and its extortion/kidnapping operations there's no way ISIS/ISIL was going away.

They are not the only outfit taking sides with Sunnis against the Shi'ia government. Jaysh Rijal al-Tariqa al-Naqshbandia (JRTN) is the Ba'ath Party relabelled. JRTN are Sunni nationalists, formerly loyal to Saddam Hussein. Their public leader is Izzat Ibrahim al-Duri -- together with Sunni tribal leaders. Earlier claims that AQI had taken over Ramadi and Fallujah may have mistaken AQI for JRTN. JRTN still has the bulk of the hundreds of tons weapons they removed from Saddam's armories. That's small arms, mortars, howitzers and the like with plenty of ammunition. JRTN has experienced leadership, going back all the way to the Iran-Iraq War in the 1980s.

Meanwhile the NeoCons and their employees continue to embarrass themselves: Reihan Salam offers that:

"A military presence [in Iraq] gives the U.S. leverage to shape political outcomes. The fundamental question is whether even a small contingent of U.S. troops might have reassured members of Iraq's minority communities by shielding them from the worst excesses of a Shia-dominated government, thus undermining those calling for its violent overthrow"

 

Also:

 

"This desire to escape subjugation has been the central driver of the various Sunni insurgencies that have rocked Iraq for more than a decade. Some Sunni militants seek not just to avoid oppression and brutality at the hands of Shias but to reassert their dominance, often on the grounds that Shias are deviants or apostates. These are the true bitter-enders, for whom no compromise is possible. Most of Iraq’s Sunnis, however, see themselves as essentially defensive in orientation, and willing to lay down their arms if they are promised the right to live in peace. It is only when U.S. officials came to understand the crisis in Iraq as a communal civil war  that they knew what they had to do to contain it: reassure the Sunnis that the Shias would do them no harm, if only because U.S. forces would keep Shia sectarianism in check."

 

This guy Salam doesn't think we know how to read a map. He wants sell the NeoCon-Likud propaganda bull that President Obama could have defused AQI/ISIS/ISIL by "negotiating" with the Iran-connected al-Maliki government to keep 10,000 American troops in Iraq after 2012. Near Baghdad, at that.

The big red splotch on the second map above speaks for itself: This Salam presentation of the NeoCon-Likud position, as quoted, is fundamentally militarily nuts. al-Maliki works for Iran, not America. nothing involving American troops is going to change that. And not even 1,000,000 American troops in Baghdad would have kept AQI/ISIS/ISIL from taking over central and eastern Syria.

In contrast, it took less than half the 2,000 in-country Iranian troops (with urban warfare training) to ramrod Iraqi army units to retake Tikrit from ISIS. This force moved directly to set up perimeter defense and overwatch positions. They are career professionals like the Americans, but the big difference generally is that they speak Arabic and understand the subtleties of Iraqi dialects for interaction and interrogation. General Suleimani has done one helluva job over the last 25 years.

 

And Tikrit is Sunni.



#17 aus

aus

    loyal member

  • longstanding member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,278 posts

Posted 17 July 2014 - 08:24 PM

While I agree that the Iraq and Syrian wars are civil wars.II am not sure the US government would gain anything by negotiating with one side. We do not know which side will  win. The USA supported Iran for a time in the Iraq=Iran war than change sides. We do not know enough about the Middle East to take sides.

I agree the conservatives are wrong but Obama is better to keep out .



#18 mmoghand

mmoghand

    member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 702 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 11:37 AM


...The USA supported Iran for a time in the Iraq=Iran war than change sides. We do not know enough about the Middle East to take sides. ....

Iran has all but taken over effective day-to-day command of the Iraqi military. AP has this from Samarra yesterday:

 

-- http://abcnews.go.co...singlePage=true

 

A powerful Iranian general has emerged as the chief tactician in Iraq's fight against Sunni militants, working on the front lines alongside 120 advisers from his country's Revolutionary Guard to direct Shiite militiamen and government forces in the smallest details of battle, militia commanders and government officials say.

 

The startlingly hands-on role of Iranian Gen. Ghasem Soleimani points to the extent of the Shiite-led Iraqi government's reliance on its ally Tehran. It also strikes a strong contrast with the more methodical, cautious approach of the United States, Iran's rival for influence in Iraq. Shiite fighters have come to idolize the Iranians who have moved into the heat of battle alongside them — with two Iranian advisers killed in fighting — while government officials grumble the United States has failed to come to their aid.

 

 

Samarra is 80 miles north from Baghdad. The city has been under attack from ISIS for weeks. What General Suleimani did there parallels work at Tikret. He organized Iraqi army and militia resources, drove off ISIS, then laid out a 10km perimeter with military overwatch strongholds. You have to defend against 120mm mortars before anything else is going to hold together.

 

General Suleimani has been seen at the al-Askari shrine. That includes attending prayers and sleeping in the cellar. He and his QF regulars are making an impression of the Iraqi public through their contacts with the local militiamen. "They are so much braver than Iraqi army commanders," a senior militia commander deployed in Samarra said of the Iranians.

 

The collection for spellings in news reports gets a new example:  "Ghasem Soleimani." This gives us roughly one new version every week. Qassim Abdil-Zahra is one of the AP writers, so I'm surprised that he adopted a variant spelling for what is his own first name.



#19 aus

aus

    loyal member

  • longstanding member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,278 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 07:43 PM

As I said elsewhere The USA should not take sides. It is true that Iraq is in control of Shites. The USA help them to power. But it does not know enough about the situation to take sides now.  General  Suleimani is an extremist shities. He will not help solve the religious problem in Iraq. He might be a military leader but  he can not bring peace.



#20 mmoghand

mmoghand

    member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 702 posts

Posted 19 July 2014 - 08:17 PM



 

As I said elsewhere The USA should not take sides. It is true that Iraq is in control of [Shiites.] The USA help them to power. .... General  Suleimani is an extremist [Shiite]. He will not help solve the religious problem in Iraq. He might be a military leader but  he can not bring peace.

 

 

 

America is a paid merc for the Saudis and Gulf State allies. They paid the Bushes hundreds of million of dollars using the Carlyle Group as the mechanism. Also, House of Bush, House of Saud traces $1.4 billion in contracts and investments from the House of Saud to the Bushes and their friends. You can google [ Bandar Bush ] for how deeply this goes.

 

That connection put America firmly on the side of Sunni fundamentalists. The Salafi-dependent "royal family." The approved charities that funnel money to all the worst of the suicide bombing groups and gangsters.

 

In contrast the Sunni faction were first repressed by the CIA-installed Shah of Iran, then slaughtered to the hundreds of thousands in part with weapons that Ronald Reagan and his people sent to Saddam Hussein in the 1980s. That included equipment that produced poison gas. In Lebanon, Reagan had US Navy ships bombard Druze and Shi'ia neighborhoods up hill from Beirut killing 1,500 civilians. His handling of Lebanon from 1982 to 1984 could hardly have been worse.

 

The Sunni fanatics have made this bed for themselves. They have supported gangsters with delusions of religious grandeur. Their Baathists in Iraq ally themselves with ISIS and supply them with military and logistic assistance. So now we have General Suleimani putting together an army as large as what General Eisenhower used to retake Paris in 1944. And far from being fanatics, Iran has not murdered its Sunni populations. Far from it. They appear not to pursue a "Winner Takes All" strategy.

 

They certainly do not use their Major Depression mental patients to carry out suicide bombings against their rivals as do the Sunnis.

 

Give it another 2 months. Time for ISIS to kidnap, extort, steal, murder their way through Sunni Nineveh Province. The Big Red area above. The Iraqi Sunnis in Nineveh will tire of them quickly enough. Then the General's 750,000 man army will have the option of creating a Paradise of battle.

 

  • Seal off the Syrian border. Same for Jordan

  • As ISIS takes no prisoners, take no prisoners

  • If Fallujah and Ramadi support ISIS then flatten them

  • Destroy every private automobile and light truck in al-Anbar and Nineveh

  • Commandeer the heavy trucks and use them to move food and fuel

  • Where local militias choose combat, kill them

 

Nineveh Province is headed to a Dark Ages wasteland. I'm not going to argue much with what General Suleimani has to do in the half-year or so it will take to eradicate ISIS. We can hope he will have momentum to push to the Turkish border. Then wheel west and meet his allies in Damascus.

 

--

 

And we're all of three months from John McCain and Lindsey Graham calling to arm the Syrian rebels. No mention of ISIS. No thought that anything we put into Syria is going straight down the road to ISIS. They're dumber than Reagan. As to Iraq ??? We are not a factor. Iran's man on the scene is al-Maliki, who came in with condition that the Americans leave.



#21 mmoghand

mmoghand

    member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 702 posts

Posted 20 July 2014 - 09:27 AM

"Sunni" defines military incompetence. Here's a summation of Bill Clinton's interview about Hamas:

 

 

We can thank former President Bill Clinton for perfect clarity in his comments about the chaos and horror of Gaza. In an interview on Indian television, Clinton—who told us in his memoir that Palestinian self-destructiveness (in the form of Yasir Arafat’s various delusions and prevarications) undid his effort to bring about a two-state solution to the Middle East conflict—blames the Muslim Brotherhood’s Gaza affiliate, Hamas, for adopting a policy of deliberate self-murder in order to present Israel with a set of impossible dilemmas. “Hamas was perfectly well aware of what would happen if they started raining rockets in Israel,” Clinton said. “They fired a thousand of them. And they have a strategy designed to force Israel to kill their own civilians so that the rest of the world will condemn them.”

 

We can thank Hamas for bringing its own form of clarity to this situation. This is the manner in which Hamas works: It builds reinforced bunkers for its leaders (under hospitals and other must-avoid targets) but purposefully neglects to build bomb shelters for the civilians in its putative care. From their bunkers, the leaders order rocket teams to target Israeli civilians. Hamas, which was responsible for the deaths of several hundred Israeli civilians during the second Palestinian uprising alone, has lately been less effective at killing Israelis, but nevertheless, the rockets keep launching. When you repeatedly fire rockets at civilian targets in a neighboring country, that country usually responds militarily. Civilians get killed during the Israeli response in part because Hamas rocket teams operate from sites that are among Gaza's most densely populated, and in part because Hamas stores its weapons in schools and mosques.

 

 

-- http://www.ndtv.com/...anscript-560395 -- reported at Salon by Jeffrey Goldberg

 

Effectively, ISIS and Hamas murder their own civilians. They accomplish nothing militarily. They terrorize and cause slaughter for their own populations. The people who finance Hamas are the same people who bought up American arms companies using the Carlyle Group for legal cover. That's where they bribed used ownership of such as BDM and TRW for the likes of Frank Carlucci, Phillip Odeen, James Baker, Richard Darman; Arthur Levitt, Michael Armacost, et.al.

 

There's a rare American who can't be bribed. Who will not take money through the Military-Industrial Complex. They're the "patriots," don'tcha know. And their politics run 100% to backing Sunni regimes and their projects despite that these projects result in ISIS and Hamas and the former al Qaeda network. The whole web of it is bizarre, black humor.



#22 aus

aus

    loyal member

  • longstanding member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,278 posts

Posted 20 July 2014 - 08:10 PM

Mnoghand, I agree that Hamas has refuse peace offers. The last was its refusal to accept the Israeli cease fire.

But even Hilary Clinton said negotiating in the Middle East  was llke "Walking on a tight rope Even the Jewish leaders were difficult to deal with . (Hilary Clinton "Living History")

 I do not think it is the arms sales but religious lobby groups in the USA that caused American government to support Israel. Besides the Jewist lobby there are born again Christians who support Israel  thinking Christ will return there soon.

 

I think neither side wants to give in for fear that more militant groups will take over.. However Israel has the greatest weapons and it has a duty to end the conflict as well.



#23 mmoghand

mmoghand

    member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 702 posts

Posted 22 July 2014 - 12:28 PM

Here's an interesting piece from Patrick Cockburn, Alexander and Andrew's brother:
Iraq crisis: How Saudi Arabia helped Isis take over the north of the country

Some time before 9/11, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, once the powerful Saudi ambassador in Washington and head of Saudi intelligence until a few months ago, had a revealing and ominous conversation with the head of the British Secret Intelligence Service, MI6, Sir Richard Dearlove. Prince Bandar told him: "The time is not far off in the Middle East, Richard, when it will be literally 'God help the Shia'. More than a billion Sunnis have simply had enough of them."


That's "Bandar Bush" for American political junkies.

Of course what Bandar plotted has backfired. Despite the impression that ISIS has conquered half of Syria and a third of Iraq, that is a very temporary invasion. Raqqa and Mosul turned out Sunni popular revolts to support ISIS. Sunni hatefulness in Mosul produced this destruction -- al-Qubba mosque:

31shiitemosque-ap.jpg

The Prince Bandar Destroy-the-Shi'ia-Mosque Exposition.

And now ISIS has no need of Saudi or Gulf State support. They have their own little oil wells. And their hatreds for Shi'ia and for "Royal Family" Sunnis exceed their near-rabid hatreds for Jews and Christians.

Wonder if the Cockburns know that "Hajj Qassim" has been sleeping in the cellar at al-Askari ???



#24 aus

aus

    loyal member

  • longstanding member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,278 posts

Posted 22 July 2014 - 07:40 PM

I am a little  puzzle as to what mmoghand is advocating. It is true the Saudi Arabia finance most sunni movements. This included September 11 and Al Quay and ISIS. You are now saying it is losing control. If that is the case Surely it would just stop financing ISIS and that would weaken it. I do not think ISIS could run the oil refineries it has conquer. So Saudi Arabia still has the wealth. I do not see how supporting the shi'as'to keep territory it won with American support would help.

 

The only solution to sectarian division is that of Ireland. Give the majority sunni areas to them, the majority shi'as areas to them and have a joint government of areas which are too divided to split up.



#25 mmoghand

mmoghand

    member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 702 posts

Posted 24 July 2014 - 12:38 PM

I am a little  puzzle as to what mmoghand is advocating. It is true the Saudi Arabia finance most sunni movements. This included September 11 and Al Quay and ISIS. You are now saying it is losing control. If that is the case Surely it would just stop financing ISIS and that would weaken it. I do not think ISIS could run the oil refineries it has conquer. So Saudi Arabia still has the wealth. .....

 

What I am advocated is realism. There is nothing that America can or should do in Iraq. Our choices ended when Bush invaded Iraq and then put Bremer in charge, aiming to destroy what had been a clear danger to Saudi hegemony. The Saudis wanted Saddam gone -- they got what they wanted.

 

Now al-Qaeda in Iraq is renamed ISIS or ISIL or simply IS for Islamic State. And militarily this group is a not much more than a sham. Up against a professional military, their field experience will not make up for what are amateurish approaches to military problems.

 

One more detail: ISIS came out with yet another demand on Syrians and Iraqis under its control. They want all the women in their areas to undergo female genital mutilation.

 

We knew they were unhinged when they destroyed the al-Qubba mosque. Now they aim to sever 10,000,000 clitorises.

 

What ??? ISIS is going "Hannibal" on us? An unusual source of protein? Fried up, with basmati and tamarind sauce ?????

 

And if you want a belly laugh there's this piece comparing General Suleimani to a Hollywood villain who happens to be an ape:

 

-- http://www.tabletmag.../planet-of-apes



#26 aus

aus

    loyal member

  • longstanding member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,278 posts

Posted 24 July 2014 - 07:28 PM

mmoghand, I agree that Isis is not more than a sham military or economically.  Whether it is the same as al Qaeda I doubt. Al Quaeda had good leadership and was part of the local sunnies. ISIS leadership seems to be mainly convert fanatics  One of them was born in Australia. It can only succeed with the support of the local sunnies and Saudi Arabia. I agree Saudi Arabia wanted to get rid of Hassan who while a sunni was not very religious. However it does not want the shí'te leadership of Iraq either .I agree that the  west should keep out.



#27 mmoghand

mmoghand

    member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 702 posts

Posted 28 July 2014 - 08:51 PM

Battle of Tikrit

 

After establishing a defensive perimeter around the city, General Suleimani has replicated tactics from the Battle of Qusayr in Syria in 2012. The largely Shi’ia force reinforced a  10-kilometer perimeter and protected the Saddam palace and the military hospital where the ISIS raiders had failed to seize control. All the roads and cross-country transit routes were blocked. This Tikrit perimeter force deploys an estimated 5,000 troops in 24/7 assignments with a substantial logistics infrastructure. Temperatures above 110F every day makes the logistics sustainability problem critical.

 

Shi'ia Iraqis are more than happy to ally with Shi'ia Iranians. Their blood enemies are the Saudis, not the Persians. Saudi support for ISIS and its clones follows their Salafi / Wahhabist beliefs. This from Patrick Cockburn:

 

 

Some time before 9/11, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, once the powerful Saudi ambassador in Washington and head of Saudi intelligence until a few months ago, had a revealing and ominous conversation with the head of the British Secret Intelligence Service, MI6, Sir Richard Dearlove. Prince Bandar told him: “The time is not far off in the Middle East, Richard, when it will be literally ‘God help the Shia’. More than a billion Sunnis have simply had enough of them.”

 

Wiping out the Shia, like wiping out Christians is good sport. On a par with Saudi Jew-hating.

 

The big drive into the western areas of Tikrit began last Wednesday. The perimeter force had to set up to block ISIS retreat. A combined 3,000-troop force of Iraqi army, militia volunteer, and Qods Force troops went in to eliminate the ISIS raiders. One guess had ISIS at 500 fighters.

 

This Shi’ia army were observed with main battle tanks, APCs with light cannon, small howitzers, and light mortars. This is a real army, not the police force troops that ISIS had seen up in Mosul. After initial feints up the Baghdad-Mosul main road to locate ISIS heavy-weapon deployments, artillery barrages last Wednesday and Thursday were followed by ground assault.

 

Early on in this battle the militia volunteers lost a couple dozen men to suicide bombers. Those losses could have been minimized. Tikrit has been a center for suicide bombing for years — 60 dead in one incident, 42 in another, 10 in another. This sort of slaughter is a mainstay of Sunni tactics — killing 8,000 Iraqis a year and more. It goes on year after year after year.

 

What's left inside the city as of yesterday is mid-scale mop-up. As many as 200 ISIS fighters could be alive, scattered in the western parts of the city. Since Tikrit and Samarra are the critical sites to contain the ISIS invasion, getting both secured has stabilized the overall strategic position (at least from the Shi'ia perspective.)  These outcomes give General Suleimani's force at least a month and a half to prepare a counterattack to retake Mosul -- aimed to develop detailed intel on ISIS positions, use the air force, interdict cargo transfers, and going 24/7 kill everything that moves and looks like ISIS.

 

The ISIS raiders become the hunted. Do not expect to see prisoners. Where ISIS raiders were able to dart around unhindered in their pickup trucks two months ago, now the cities have defensive perimeters. Open country is surveilled by drones and chops with vision-augmenting military systems. Expect to see ISIS take significant casualties.



#28 Dax

Dax

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 21,388 posts

Posted 29 July 2014 - 10:36 AM

The whole Sunni--Shia conflict seems idiotic to me, they've been at it since the death of the prophet. Shias consider Imams almost holy, sinless, like saints. They think the prophet's family should have continued his rule, rather than having a new leader selected from the most qualified people. Sunnis believe the opposite, and certainly do not believe in sinless Imams and saints. So that's basically the conflict, and it seems to me a live and let live approach would work far better for the region than tribal hatred, but honestly, these middle easterners are stupid enough to continue the hatred forever.



#29 mmoghand

mmoghand

    member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 702 posts

Posted 29 July 2014 - 04:52 PM

Radio in Baghdad yesterday reported that the death toll from the ISIS invasion had topped 6,000 known/identified victims.

 

What you've got is a one sided example of sectarian barbarism. ISIS is a paid proxy for the Saudis, same as the recruiters for Iraq's suicide bombers. Suicide bombings in Iraq are aimed only at Shi'ia. The notion of martyrdom through suicide is a Salafi (extreme Sunni) concept out of Saudi Arabia. Shi'ia believe none of it.

 

The common analogy is that being Shi'ia in ISIS territory is like being a Jew in Nazi Germany.

 

There is nothing like these murderous tactics going the other way. The Shi'ia are not attacking Sunni civilians. There is no difference to citizenship rights. There have been several cycles of civil war in Iraq, rumbles between sectarian militias, but that is not a description of what is happening today. The counterattack against ISIS at Tikrit is a professional military action -- 300 dead through Sunday/Monday with an expectation that another 200 scattered ISIS fighters would be neutralized shortly. That's while taking light casualties except for the middle weeks of the battle where untrained militiamen were hit with suicide bomber attacks.

 

Despite that Saudis planned and carried out the 9/11 attacks and finance Hamas and run pro-jihadi schools all over the MENA countries, Americans still get a full load of propaganda claiming that Iran is an Axis of Evil monster-regime. The quote from Prince Bandar, above, reflects Saudi disdain for Shi'ia Muslims. You can also research what the Saudis' text books say about Christians and Jews.



#30 aus

aus

    loyal member

  • longstanding member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,278 posts

Posted 29 July 2014 - 08:03 PM

In any conflict truth gives way to propaganda. It is true the Sh'ía are under attack and the USA is more afraid of Iran because it could have nuclear weapons. However in the past the USA has supported the Sh'ia in Iraq and allow them to take control of the government and army. Western interference has always made things worst in the Middle East. It is not true that Sh'ía  think there imams are sinless saints. The main division is that they believe Muhammad  relatives on the Mother's side were holy and continue on Muhammad work. This is very like the Catholic idea of Mary and the saints continuing Christ mission. The Sunnies like most Protestants believe in only one messenger from God.





Reply to this topic



  



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: qassim suleimani, iraq, iran, qods force

Copyright © 2017 Fool Moon LLC