[Closed] Mosul- Iraq

Listening to the news it was the former Iraqi military that have taken it!

No one's really interested hora, just like no one is interested in the mess that we helped to create in Libya, or the mess we're helping to create now in Syria through our despotic friends. So let's keep embarrassing news out of the limelight eh ?

Listening to the news it was the former Iraqi military that have taken it!

The Ba'athist party behind it??

No. Former Iraqi soldiers fighting with ISIS.

Seems pretty obvious to me that if you have a country like Iraq made up of many different factions then you need a strongman dictator to keep them all in line . Sure Saddam wasn't perfect but Iraq ran a whole lot better with him in charge . Also if you try and force democracy onto a country it really ceases to be democracy .

I'm sure some remote controlled freedom will be delivered to the area shortly

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2014/06/tens-thousands-flee-unrest-iraq-mosul-201461175824711415.html

Says ISIL fighters also in Kirkuk and Salaheddin (so spreading).

Could it be that starting to lose in Syria, ISIL diverted its resources towards Iraq?

Ramsey Neil - theres a line/woman in the series Generation Kill that struck me- a Iraqi woman says 'why are you here, why did you invade? Baghdad was peaceful, Saddam was an idiot but we don't deserve this'

I never understood the logic of going into Iraq. I've posted before about how my Iraqi colleague explained that things where terrible under Hussain but much much worse under the new regime and he really feared for the long term future. Well this is it, we are seeing the long term future. Any loss of life in a war is to be deeply regretted but the sacrifice so many have made in Iraq will be proven to be for nothing

As @Ramsey says and we have seen in Egypt and Libya if you depose a regime you cannot be sure what you will get in it's place.

Anyone else noticed how FAST this new bunch has grown? Doesn't seem that long ago they were just a minor player in the Syria nause-up. Now they've taken a major city.

I understand they're Sunni? Iran must be gearing up again, then.

Former Iraqi soldiers fighting with ISIS.

Iraq must be full of former soldiers - pretty much any male over conscription age I would have thought.

Sorry but you are suprised by this?

Send Tony and Bushballs back in, on thier own, no guns n stuff, no back up..

I've a fiver ready for the plane ticket.. 😀

Maybe a Kickstarter project page should be built..

Did we castrate the Iraqi military, destroy it back in 2003 because its bloody ineffective now isn't it

Its not the effective fighting force it was under Saddam

I never understood the logic of going into Iraq.

It was the messianic arrogance of Tony Blair and his best buddy Bush that got us into Iraq, not logic, that and the absolute certainty that Iraq was a weak country which could easily be defeated, ie, that they didn't have any nasty weapons of mass destruction which could be used against us. It all seemed so easy and straightforward.

I think I'd like to hear from Tony Blair on this subject.

What happens now Tony?

Perfect, now they're all in one place we can apply the Grozny/Fallujah solution!

Wasn't it a gamble on Tony's side- he was being promised that WMD WOULD be found/it was only a matter of time and Bush was already well on the path to invasion. I think past a certain point, it was a point of no return. Mid-invasion it became clear there was no evidence found by the Inspectors nor would there be. Thats when Blair turned it into Saddams evil/found evidence of torture/torture jails etc etc to lessen the political impact.

I think I'd like to hear from Tony Blair on this subject.

What happens now Tony?

Isn't he busy working on peace for the Middle East?

Oh, hang on...

I think I'd like to hear from Tony Blair on this subject.

Tony Blair is still available for opinions on the subject :

[url= http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/apr/23/tony-blair-battle-islamic-extremism-political-agenda ]Tony Blair to say battle against Islamic extremism is paramount[/url]

He certainly has a track record of fighting Islamic extremism, after all he did help to put Al-Qaeda in Iraq, which made it necessary for UK forces to fight them.

Although he has now changed his mind that the way to fight Islamic extremism is through "democracy". It turns out that he isn't such a big fan of democracy in the Middle East after all :

[i]Blair caused controversy when he sided with the Egyptian military's overthrow of the democratically elected government [/i]

Isn't he busy working on his personal cashpoint, the Middle East

FTFY

Post-colonial realignment of borders innit. Imperial europe carved up the middle east using things like lines of lattitude/longitude and random georaphical features in the 20's-50's (Iraq being 'Winstons Folly'). Then we're surprised when there's conflict from the tribes/sects/ethnicities we've shoe-horned together, all fostering centuries of simmering rivalries. General watsit on R4 this morning was about right. It'll take generations to settle down and the borders will look very different and we'll have some unpleasant regimes to deal with to get at the oil (and presumably some less unpleasant ones - but they probably won't have the oil).

I wonder how well St Tony sleeps at night.
He must get the night terrors knowing that he has made the biggest **** ups this century.
Being a good god fearing catholic he must know the flames await him.

I think the catholocism thing was based on repenting and getting away with it.

Mr Blair is a public speaker now so you may get charge £200k/hr just to speak to him on a stage.

Quids innnn ...

Perhaps if we ask Tony, he'll give us the 'gist' of what we should do about it

he was being promised that WMD WOULD be found/it was only a matter of time

Of course he knew that WMDs wouldn't be found, that's why it was imperative for him that the invasion of Iraq be started before the UN weapons inspectors had completed their work. Remember how Hans Blix and his team of UN inspectors were warned "get out of Iraq because we're going to start bombing" ?

And Robin Cook the UK Foreign Minister at the time had access to the same intelligence sources as Tony Blair, the conclusion he came to was that Iraq was going to be attacked because it was weak - not because it was a threat.

What Tony Blair expected was that the stated reason for going into Iraq would be quickly forgotten, just like the stated reason for going into Afghanistan, ie to arrest Osama bin Laden, was quickly forgotten.

The problem for Blair was that because of far greater opposition to the Iraq war than had existed over Afghanistan he had to overstate the excuse for attacking Iraq, so far from people quietly forgetting about why we went into Iraq it came back to haunt him.

EDIT : And to be fair to Blair had there been huge heaving happy crowds rejoicing and and celebrating their liberation from Saddam when the Western troops rolled into Baghdad, then I'm sure people would have quickly forgiven him for the failure of finding WMDs and hailed him as a hero.

Unfortunately for him because it all went tits up the reaction instead was "so where's these ****ing WMDs arsehole?"

I'm not going to get into the politics or history of this piece, but it was really graphically represented to me this morning on the radio when one journalist stated that "it's like the city of Manchester falling under enemy control within 24 hours".

That's a pretty big area to cover, pretty fast and my heart goes out to all those thousands of families that are currently running away from home to a place of safety.

(Please note, some would say that Manchester falling under enemy control would be a good thing, but not me. I quite like it)

nickc - Member

Perhaps if we ask Tony, he'll give us the 'gist' of what we should do about it

The 'gist' will be about "The brilliance of Blair as British PM with the power of spin" ...

£200K quids please ... (Blair grinning with his hand out stretched palm facing you)

I wonder how much ISL were helped by all of that 'non-lethal' aid they were supplied with?

And Robin Cook the UK Foreign Minister at the time had access to the same intelligence sources as Tony Blair, the conclusion he came to was that Iraq was going to be attacked because it was weak - not because it was a threat.

I often wondered about the "convenient timing" of his death.

A friend of Mrs Zip is one of St Tonys bodyguards I hope he isn't too near when destiny comes calling.

bigG - the size of Greater Manchester? If so that'd take quite a force. Not a few hundred on the back of pickups.

zippykona - Member

A friend of Mrs Zip is one of St Tonys bodyguards I hope he isn't too near when destiny comes calling.

The money is good working as bodyguard so friend of Mrs Zip will be the sacrificial goat in exchange when destiny comes calling ...

Quids in ... £200k please as Blair grins towards you. 😆

the size of Greater Manchester? If so that'd take quite a force.

Not really. I'm sure a thousand or so armed men could effectively take control of Manchester if demoralised army and police forces were to flee.

The US would have invaded Iraq on it's own, so whether we went in or not it would not have changed the outcome for that country. I actually believe any likely UK Prime Minister Labour or Conservative would have been in the same position, actually I think Blair had very little choice.

@ernie - we went in to Afganistan to counteract the Taliban and Al-Queda who where headquartered there, it was never about arresting an individual.

This would be an ideal time to finally publish the Chilcott Enquiries findings. I expect we'll see it any day now.

Not really. I'm sure a thousand or so armed men could effectively take control of Manchester if demoralised army and police forces were to flee

Then we're surprised when there's conflict from the tribes/sects/ethnicities we've shoe-horned together, all fostering centuries of simmering rivalries.

if you have a country like Iraq made up of many different factions then you need a strongman dictator to keep them all in line .

@ernie - we went in to Afganistan to counteract the Taliban and Al-Queda who where headquartered there, it was never about arresting an individual.

Nope, that's not true. The then leader of Afghanistan Mullah Omar was specifically told that Afghan government had to hand over Osama bin Laden so that he could be put on trial for planning 9/11, failure to do so would result in military action against Afghanistan.

Mullah Omar initially responded by saying that Osama bin Laden would only be handed over if was to be put on trial in a neutral country. The West/US said this was unacceptable and again threaten to take military action against Afghanistan if he wasn't handed over.

Finally Mullah Omar said that they would hand him over but didn't know where he was. The West/US responded by saying this was totally unaccepted and shortly afterwards started bombing.

All along the Taliban government in Kabul was told that no military action would be taken if Osama bin Laden was handed over so that he could be put on trial for planning 9/11.

See how easily people forget ?

[i][b]"This is non-negotiable. There is no need to discuss innocence or guilt; we know he's guilty. Turn him over. If they want us to stop our military operations they've just got to meet my conditions."[/b][/i] George Bush October 2001

Someone just needs to tell them that the final whistle has already blown:[img] [/img]

Then they'll all just go home, no problem.

Looks like they're not happy with one city, and they're after another. Anyone would think that they were trying to establish some kind of hardline islamic caliphate in the region? But nobody has ever mentioned anything as bonkers as that, so I suppose thats why the security services were caught so off their guard. Those sneaky muslamic buggers

In the long term, unfortunately all "they" (the extremists) will achieve is putting Iraq back into the "dark ages" in terms of it's society. When you see the scientific and cultural history that Iraq had, this is a real shame. Unfortunately, the extremists are just that, extreme, so they don't play by our 1st world political and cultural stds.

We, the west, had a go at changing things, but it didn't work, and now i think is the time to just build a wall and shut the doors. Unfortunately this will condemn millions of ordinary Iraq people to a horrible life, but i see no other option....

In the long term, unfortunately all "they" (the extremists) will achieve is putting Iraq back into the "dark ages" in terms of it's society. When you see the scientific and cultural history that Iraq had, this is a real shame. Unfortunately, the extremists are just that, extreme, so they don't play by our 1st world political and cultural stds.

We, the west, had a go at changing things, but it didn't work, and now i think is the time to just build a wall and shut the doors. Unfortunately this will condemn millions of ordinary Iraq people to a horrible life, but i see no other option....

Binners you are missing the big picture....have they got any oil yet?

Erm..... Aren't you forgetting why we went in there in the first place. It certainly wasn't because of any concern for the ordinary Iraqi citizen. There's the small matter of all that black stuff underneath the country. Which now has a bunch of psychotic beardies sat on top of it*

The news is focussing on them over-running cities, but I suspect it's the oilfields and infrastructure that the puppet regime is most concerned about. Judging from the noises coming from Iraq though, the government don't seem to have the remotest clue what to do, apart from ask the Americans for air strikes

..... And here we go again!

* not Mumford and Sons on Meth