Iraq: Out of the desert into Mosul (closed)

[Ray]

Obama says no combat troops to Iraq; U.S. weighs airstrikes

No troops to Iraq, but other options are being considered.

That was President Barack Obama's message Friday in response to the lightning advance by Sunni militant fighters in Iraq that could threaten the government of Shiite Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki........

Pressure for the United States to provide military support to Iraq's struggling government has increased, with conservative Republicans blaming Obama for creating a security vacuum in 2011 by pulling out U.S. troops.
http://edition.cnn.com/2014/06/13/us/iraq-us/

What is the predominant opinion in the US about how to solve the issue and stop this 'invasion'?

Obama cannot go back on the pledge to end US involvement in Iraq.

I wonder how many Americans, at the time when Obama made the pledge and acted on it, would endorse the Republican claim that Obama created a 'security vacuum' implying that he should not have withdrawn.

The manner in which the ISIS is moving in, the greater the delay in acting, would only make the situation wretched.

If no troops are to be used, then should Drones not be used before Iraq is lost to the fundamentalists?

The uncertainty as to what will happen to Iraq is only pushing up oil prices and that would lead to inflation.

Uncertainty over Iraq pushes oil price to three-month high
http://www.theguardian.com/business/...isis-militants

It will also water down the effect the Western sanctions on Russia over Ukraine. Russian oil will be in high demand to offset the loss of Iraqi oil, which has the second largest oilfields in the world, with the added advantage of being 'sweet' oil.

But he clearly indicated that plans are being drawn up to give support to the Iraqi military. That would most likely be aerial support and there were reports of the Pentagon preparing to order the George HW Bush aircraft carrier into the Persian Gulf this weekend.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...t-9535810.html

What effect would one aircraft carrier have?

[carl]

Ray:

The drones will be of no use unless they can be directed to a target. Unless we put people on the ground in Iraq to help with that they would be useless. Mr. Obama won't put people on the ground, but he might send in various drones to make 6 o'clock news strikes. So I would not be surprised to see us send in drones whose missions are to look good for the camera.

[Ray]

Ray:

The drones will be of no use unless they can be directed to a target. Unless we put people on the ground in Iraq to help with that they would be useless. Mr. Obama won't put people on the ground, but he might send in various drones to make 6 o'clock news strikes. So I would not be surprised to see us send in drones whose missions are to look good for the camera.

I presume it could be done the same way as it is being done in Pakistan.

I daresay that the US withdrew from Iraq, after a high cost in human and financial terms, would not have cultivated and organised a humint that is active in Iraq.

Therefore, would it be incorrect to surmise that the US can use drones, even if they do not wish to put boots on the ground.

What do you think is the aim of sending the aircraft carrier?

Hoping for a commodore Perry repeat?

[carl]

I presume it could be done the same way as it is being done in Pakistan.

I daresay that the US withdrew from Iraq, after a high cost in human and financial terms, would not have cultivated and organised a humint that is active in Iraq.

Therefore, would it be incorrect to surmise that the US can use drones, even if they do not wish to put boots on the ground.

What do you think is the aim of sending the aircraft carrier?

Hoping for a commodore Perry repeat?

I figure in Pakistan we hit what the Pak Army/ISI allows us to hit, so that doesn't apply.

I would also be shocked into momentary catatonia if we had any kind of humint network or networks in Iraq. This latest thing came like a bolt from the blue. We do machines, not people. Humming is people. That doesn't mean we won't make drone strikes. It just means they will be blind and for PR.

The aim of sending a carrier is so the administration can say they sent a carrier. It makes them look fierce without having to actually do anything.

[OUTLAW 09]

What is the predominant opinion in the US about how to solve the issue and stop this 'invasion'?

Obama cannot go back on the pledge to end US involvement in Iraq.

I wonder how many Americans, at the time when Obama made the pledge and acted on it, would endorse the Republican claim that Obama created a 'security vacuum' implying that he should not have withdrawn.

The manner in which the ISIS is moving in, the greater the delay in acting, would only make the situation wretched.

If no troops are to be used, then should Drones not be used before Iraq is lost to the fundamentalists?

The uncertainty as to what will happen to Iraq is only pushing up oil prices and that would lead to inflation.



It will also water down the effect the Western sanctions on Russia over Ukraine. Russian oil will be in high demand to offset the loss of Iraqi oil, which has the second largest oilfields in the world, with the added advantage of being 'sweet' oil.



What effect would one aircraft carrier have?

With a country having 60% Shia and Iran next door there is no danger of Iraq ever going Sunni fundamentalist any time so---the Shia will not give up the current power they did not have for the last 60 or so years and they fight well as we learned via JAM and the Special Groups and Mahdi.

There is though a danger that Iraq splits into three separate countries and now the Sunni triangle has oil reserves thus a chance to develop alone if needed as did the Kurds.

Malaki was a fool for not sharing the wealth and reaching out--but he was always a dictator at heart and yes US military and State Dept types who were around him hid that fact as it endangered the overall mission which was to get out under the guise of "democracy".

Anything Obama does that kills Sunni civilians in the process will be viewed as a direct support to the Shia and Malaki and wins him absolutely nothing with the Sunni who are still at the heart of any solution there if anything it would stiffen their fighting as they will message to the Islamic world see it is the Sunni against the Shai and they are supported by the Americans.

Sunni's are still the majority Islamic grouping worldwide.

[Ray]

With a country having 60% Shia and Iran next door there is no danger of Iraq ever going Sunni fundamentalist any time so---the Shia will not give up the current power they did not have for the last 60 or so years and they fight well as we learned via JAM and the Special Groups and Mahdi.

There is though a danger that Iraq splits into three separate countries and now the Sunni triangle has oil reserves thus a chance to develop alone if needed as did the Kurds.

Malaki was a fool for not sharing the wealth and reaching out--but he was always a dictator at heart and yes US military and State Dept types who were around him hid that fact as it endangered the overall mission which was to get out under the guise of "democracy".

Anything Obama does that kills Sunni civilians in the process will be viewed as a direct support to the Shia and Malaki and wins him absolutely nothing with the Sunni who are still at the heart of any solution there if anything it would stiffen their fighting as they will message to the Islamic world see it is the Sunni against the Shai and they are supported by the Americans.

Sunni's are still the majority Islamic grouping worldwide.

Just a question for your consideration since it appears that you have operated in the Middle East.

In the Middle East and Iran belt where oil is produced appears to be predominantly populated by the Shia. Is that correct?



If so, what is interplay between geopolitics and geostrategy in these events that are unfolding and did they impinge on the earlier events and its fallout thereof?

My apologies for this rather large map. (If it could be made smaller, then it will be fine. I am not very computer savvy).