Iraq: Out of the desert into Mosul (closed)

[AmericanPride]

See AP this is exactly why you are so often off base to the point of hanging onto the aged idea of negotiations which is suppose to solve everything.

Where did I state that negotiations "solve everything"?

---but I guess it goes to the fact that you never served in Iraq either in the military or as a civilian.

Really go back and fully understand Khomeini and his Green Crescent expansionism of Shiaism. Go back and fully understand the Iraq/Iran war from 80/88 as an attempt by the Sunni's to reign in that Shia expansionism by Khomeini.

This is indeed a Sunni Shia clash and that is what is behind the regional hegemony infighting.

That schism is really a pretext by superficial Western analysts like yourself to excuse any effort at building a rigorous understanding of the problems of the region and the states within it. And since we've been busy since 2003 implementing a strategy on the basis of this myth, we've helped actually make it a reality. What's behind the regional hegemony infighting is an unstable regional security system heavily penetrated by outside actors (namely the U.S.) complicated by the large concentration of fairly weak states.

I did not state that it has "nothing to do with religion". You should really spend more time investing in your education because if you had, then you would not be mistating other people's comments.

[AmericanPride]

AP you really need to fully understand the region of Iraq and Syria and it's relationship to US/Russian politics--or have noticed that instead of assisting the US in seeking a solution in Syria Russia has resisted us at every turn--so again AP notice the linkage into the Ukraine?

I pointed out weeks ago the linkages in the international system when I asked you repeatedly about the potential consequences for U.S. security if the U.S.-Russian conflict continued to escalate and Russia opted to pursue a strategy as a spoiler. You failed to provide any answers.

[OUTLAW 09]

So yes I tend to understand the Sunni Shia clash---you really do need to read the Koran more often and a couple of recent USC books that have hit the market on the Sunni Shia Clash.

Highly recommend one reads the following two books and couple of others on the Muslim Botherhood;

The Shia Revival by Vali Nasr

Wahhabi Islam From Revival and Reform to Global Jihad by Natana J. Delong-bas

[Firn]

Luftbruecke zu den Jeziden, Sinjar, Irak is a video uploaded by Michel Reimon, the Austrian EU parlamentarian and current delegate in Iraw. It has footage from the helicopter operations. He says at the end that no additional missions could be flown due to lack of fuel and that they even had to land away from the starting base. It took him seven hours to come back into his 'clean room', seeing thousends of refugees during the drive.

[AmericanPride]

I can call back up you long list of things the West needed to do that you recommended which read like a mirhond article which he gets into sometimes.

Be my guest.

So there is no linkage as you seem to argue?

You would be once again mistaken since I have made it clear in multiple posts that there are many linkages in the international system; a fact which you have with great effort avoided addressing when I have asked you repeatedly about the potential consequences of continued conflict escalation in the U.S.-Russian relationship.

[AmericanPride]

So yes I tend to understand the Sunni Shia clash---you really do need to read the Koran more often and a couple of recent USC books that have hit the market on the Sunni Shia Clash.

The Koran is great for understanding terminology, ideas, and context. It's not so great in explaining the structure of the regional security regime, the fraility of Middle Eastern states, and the consequences of persistent international penetration of the region. Whether Arabs worshipped Allah or the Flying Spaghetti Monister, the destruction of Iraq would have produced the kind of violence we are witnessing unfold today. The revival of militant Islam and the explosion of sectarian violence is not the cause of the fundamental conflict in the region; it's the expression of that conflict through a religious (and ethnic) frame.

[OUTLAW 09]

You missed the most important piece---sitting between the fronts of the various Sunni and Shia groups in the middle of Beirut in the 80s using a battleship for fire support to just quiet things down a bit so one could hear one think.

So yes I tend to understand the Sunni Shia clash---you really do need to read the Koran more often and a couple of recent USC books that have hit the market on the Sunni Shia Clash.

Highly recommend one reads the following two books and couple of others on the Muslim Botherhood;

The Shia Revival by Vali Nasr

Wahhabi Islam From Revival and Reform to Global Jihad by Natana J. Delong-bas

AP---to continue your expansion education on the ME---go into Google and search for the Black September---then check what occurred in an around the palace of the King of Jordan.

some of us spent time in tha palace and it was not cakes and coffee being thrown at us for two weeks but AK47 rounds.

So AP some understand this region far more than is comfortable.

The education continued---Google and search first the Baader/Meinhof Gang and then the RAF---both were in my German university political science classes and debated with them and their group and then I watched them slowly drift into terrorism.

So again you bring up a good point---education is actually important---the question becomes is it targeted against the region that one is interested in or does it miss the mark to never be used again.

[OUTLAW 09]

The Koran is great for understanding terminology, ideas, and context. It's not so great in explaining the structure of the regional security regime, the fraility of Middle Eastern states, and the consequences of persistent international penetration of the region. Whether Arabs worshipped Allah or the Flying Spaghetti Monister, the destruction of Iraq would have produced the kind of violence we are witnessing unfold today. The revival of militant Islam and the explosion of sectarian violence is not the cause of the fundamental conflict in the region; it's the expression of that conflict through a religious (and ethnic) frame.

But see AP you miss the point again---it explains the thinking, the acting, the morality of the individuals we call terrorists or others might call freedom fighters or in the case of IS--Takfirists.

See AP the Salafists interpret the Koran differently than do Takfirists--unless and this is critical unless you truly understand how they interpret the differences---How do you actually analyze their movements/internal developments, their thoughts, their politics, and their reasons for fighting Shia or for that matter each other. You mentioned Wahhabism---they have their own interpretations as well that cross over both.

And more importantly how and why do they form coalitions now with say the IS and then later other groups.

See AP Islam is a complete package---economic thoughts, political thoughts, judicial thoughts and morality. The Koran is the centerpiece and the core document---understand it and you understand more than you will ever need to in understanding the Sunni Shia clash and what drove Khomeini and still drives the core Iranian group--the Quds Force as it both protects and expands the Green Crescent in the name of Khomeini.

See AP it is all connected--you tend to just see the "big picture" without understanding that the small bits and pieces actually form the big picture.

You do not see that complete package in say Christianity. Therefore the core differences right now in how IS is treating Christians.

They are acting out of the Takfiri mindset---many Salafists will tolerate Christians under the concept of "they are also people of the book". Secular Muslims and there are many in Iraq totally tolerate Christians--but where do we hear that being mentioned-and secular Muslims tolerate Shia and often intermarry and yes Sunni do convert to Shia--right now it is only IS that is being talked about.

Now you can understand the violence angle of IS.

[AmericanPride]

See AP the Salafists interpret the Koran differently than do Takfirists--unless and this is critical unless you truly understand how they interpret the differences---How do you actually analysis their movements, their thoughts, their politics, and their reasons for fighting Shia or for that mater each other.

See AP Islam is a complete package---economic thoughts, political thoughts, judicial thoughts and morality. the Koran is the centerpiece and the core document---yesterday it and you understand more than you will ever need to in understanding the Sunni Shia clash and what drove Khomeini and still drives the core Iranian group--the Quds force

Hence my comment that:

The Koran is great for understanding terminology, ideas, and context

You do not see that in say Christianity.

Actually - you do, mostly among the religious right (Evangelicials, dominonists, etc).

But neither Christianity or Islam explain conflict in international and regional systems, nor the consequences of failure in projects of state formation. Not one word written in either religious script would have provided any predictability for the fall-out of the destruction of Iraq.

[OUTLAW 09]

The constant reference to your experiences and the refrain about the supposed lack of credibility in the experiences of others only speaks to your own insecurity in the strength of your argument.

See AP--again you overstate--there is another old saying in the intel and SF world and you are no where being close it---"walk the walk talk the talk" and right now you are not even "walking".

That is what education is for my friend--as book learning with only get you so far and you have reached that limit as your comments really do show a lack of understanding.

[OUTLAW 09]

Hence my comment that:





Actually - you do, mostly among the religious right (Evangelicials, dominonists, etc).

But neither Christianity or Islam explain conflict in international and regional systems, nor the consequences of failure in projects of state formation. Not one word written in either religious script would have provided any predictability for the fall-out of the destruction of Iraq.

See AP again you do not get it---yes one might even argue as some on the Left here in Europe do argue--a Christian fundamentalist is just as dangerous as a jihadi.

Give it some thought and you will find yourself agreeing--all fundamentalism is deadly regardless from right or left.

But here we are talking about Islam and how it has evolved in the ME especially the two strains Sunni and Shia.

You do realize that there is a deep political and governmental system inside Islam right AP?--- and there have been deep internal Sunni debate on how governmental functions should be in Islam---the problem has been there seems to be always a dictator standing in the way or say the Muslim Brotherhood felt they could shift a basically secular Islamic country ie Egypt to an Islamic State without asking the population.

That is the core problem right now in Iraq---the Sunni have a governing vision and the Shia historically have not had that strong a view on governing and we the US allowed a Shia dictator to emerge---so why did we invade to eliminate Saddam when we got Malaki in exchange?.

That was until Khomeini filled the Shia governing void with what can be called a ruling Shia theocracy and that my friend you will not/do not find in the Shia historical thoughts on governing. Actually if you read deeper in the net you will find that is the real reason al Sadr left Iran and why he and Sistani are often of the same views on how to govern a multi Islam state.

Really go back and Google the Green Crescent concept and you will understand exactly why there is a regional hegemony fight going on between Iran the "Protector" of Shiaism and the KSA the "Protector" of the global Sunni community.

[OUTLAW 09]

Hence my comment that:





Actually - you do, mostly among the religious right (Evangelicials, dominonists, etc).

But neither Christianity or Islam explain conflict in international and regional systems, nor the consequences of failure in projects of state formation. Not one word written in either religious script would have provided any predictability for the fall-out of the destruction of Iraq.

See AP I am not interested in explaining how it fits into an international or regional system---I am interested in how both solve their own problems without outside influence.

There is an overworked concept called rule of law and good governance--it should be and must be up to the target population to work through and resolve their own issues--we can stand on the side and assist or offer advice but in the end it is that target population that must define what the rule of law and good governance looks and acts like for them and not for some international system.

It is not up to us or anyone else to determine that decision making process and yes it might be brutal and ugly but they own it and it is their own developmental path.

Now go back and look at the Maidan and the following attempt by Russia to control the outcome of the Colored Revolts---why out of fear they would be the next Colored Revolt.

AP it is that simple---you read far more into these things than is necessary---it is not rocket science and yet you attempt to make it a science--and that is your fatal flaw.

[slapout9]

Slap, rather than flattening those places, which I think would be unwise, how about taking them? I don't mean us taking them, I mean other Muslims taking them from the Saudis. Where is it written that the House of Saud must have authority over those places? Why not the Kurds, or the Turks or the Malaysians? Why should those lazy, fat trouble making Saudis have them if they refuse to shape up? IS is eventually going to go after those places anyway and the Saudis couldn't stand against those guys but others could. Maybe we should look at openly backing a side in the contest that is occurring within Islam between the takfiri killers and everybody else. If the takfiris win the contest it will be all of Islam against the rest of the world. That is what they are aiming to bring about. We should recognize that and try to figure out how to stop it.

It's already happened sort of anyway and Bin Laden name was all over it. This is part of Muslim prophecies. A false Mahdi would attack Mecca and fail!!!!!!!thye beleive it happened in 1979. The real Mahdi will lead the Black Flaged Muslim Armies to conquer Iraq and Afghanistan or so the prophecy goes.Watch the link below.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nV6m8K21O8Y

[slapout9]

Link to Pat Lang comment on ISIS Tactics.

http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_s...-damshtml.html

[slapout9]

Link not working for me.

try this this one and scroll down to 7 AUG 2014 for the post I am talking about.

http://turcopolier.typepad.com/

[davidbfpo]

Three threads are closed to enable people to cool down and to enable a review. This one thread. I will endeavour to open the thread tomorrow.

[davidbfpo]

I have deleted three posts and edited slightly four posts.

[davidbfpo]

SWC has clearly set terms of reference and rules of engagement, which are all set out at:http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/faq.php

SWC respects the right of members to post using psuedonyms. members are not required to provide an introduction on joining, nor are 'credentials' required. We are a "broad church" of experience, interests and standpoints. We are not a political board, although politics is ever present.

On a number of issues, in the past and today, members engagement changes and lurches into sniping or personal attacks. Members often contact a Moderator when concerned, a few post their dismay. It maybe appopriate for a Moderator to then take action.

SWC is open for non-members (with a few exceptions) to read and has an excellent reputation for its content. Sometimes the wrong word(s) can damage SWC.

[JWing]

Wow, my computer gets broken by my baby cousin and when I come back here everything has gone to hell.

Anyway, the days of Nouri al-Maliki's premiership are coming to an end. Maliki attempted to repeat his strategy from 2010 which was to drag out the government formation process and outlast his opponents. This time it backfired as not only did State of Law fracture but even his own Dawa Party did. Those splits allowed for the nomination of Haidar Abadi from Dawa to be the next premier. It's not known what Abadi will be like but it does offer the opportunity for a new start for Iraqi politics which is crucial if it wants to reverse the security situation. Here's my article on the whole affair.

[KingJaja]

There seems to be no sense of ownership of Iraq from the US political elite - there's a lot of buck passing and electoral calculus, but no sense of responsibility.

This would be fine if the US had no pretensions to global leadership; but it does - and US politicians go on as if the rest of the World hasn't figured out the geo-strategic incompetence of the US ruling elite.

The rest of the World understood the US was definitely going to be less relevant economically as the years went by (that was clear after the 2008 financial crisis). What is a revelation is how quickly America's geo-strategic relevance is being eroded.

America's great advantage over the Chinese in most parts of the developing World is its military, but Iraq demonstrates the limitation of that military, but most importantly the failure of imagination of the policy makers wielding that tool.

So where does US go - after Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq?