# Iraqi Sunnis take up arms against ISIL radicals



## NotfooledbyW (Aug 15, 2014)

August 15, 2014 Headline out of Iran:

*Iraqi Sunnis take up arms against ISIL radicals*  Friday, August 15, 2014 10:18 PM



> 25 prominent Sunni tribes have taken up arms against radical militants and their allies in west of the Iraqi capital, a tribal leader and officers have said.



So why would anyone ever believe that all Sunnis are ISIL?

*On 08-10-2014 at 11:13 AM tinydancer *wrote,* "What a fucking pantload. This has nothing at all to do with Sunni disenchantment with a Shia government. ISIS couldn't give a rats ass about who is in power in Baghdad. I know Obama is aiming for a two for one to try to rid Syria of Assad and Iraq of Maliki but this bullshit you are trotting out in good Obamabot fashion is beyond the pale.    

See *thread: &#8220;I blame Bushes for destabilizing Iraq..."

Here's the report that must stun tinydancer's mind:

*!!!!! 25 prominent Sunni tribes have taken up arms against radical militants and their allies in west of the Iraqi capital, a tribal leader and officers have said.!!!!!!*
Isn't it amazing how Obama get's the people of Iraq fight against their enemies without getting US troops killed on the ground to do it?



> The uprising against extremists in Anbar province, where radicals from the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) group and insurgent allies hold major areas, came a day after Nouri al-Maliki, the Iraqi premier, abandoned his bid for a third term.
> The current effort could potentially be a major turning point in Iraq's two-month conflict against an ISIL-led offensive.
> 
> "This popular revolution was agreed on with all the tribes that want to fight ISIL, which spilled our blood," Sheikh Abdel-Jabbar Abu Risha, one of the leaders of the uprising, told AFP.





More:



> Anbar police chief Maj. Gen. Ahmed Saddak said security forces were backing the uprising, which began at 6:00 am Friday.
> 
> "The battles are continuing until this moment," he said, putting the toll at 12 militants killed and adding: "We will not stop until the liberation of Anbar."
> 
> The push by tribesmen and security forces began with attacks on multiple areas northwest of Anbar provincial capital Ramadi, Abu Risha and Saddak said.




http://en.alalam.ir/news/1623289

The case that Sunnis in Iraq were disenfranchised by Maliki is well established.

So now Iraq will become a ISIL terrorist 'bug zapper' for ISIL cockroaches. Kkurds, Shiites, an Sunni tribes can kill them all. with minimal US air support and stirkes. 

Cockroaches can't fly can they?


----------



## dilloduck (Aug 15, 2014)

Hallalujah !!!   No more problems in Iraq  !!!! This will work for sure.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Aug 15, 2014)

Syria too: 


*Sunni tribe rises up against ISIL in Syria   *2014-08-14 By Waleed Abu al-Khair in Cairo 



> As alliances forged by the "Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant" (ISIL) with tribes and factions in Iraq and Syria begin to crumble, local populations under the group's control are losing their fear of fighting back, analysts and activists told Al-Shorfa.
> 
> The recent clashes between ISIL gunmen and fighters from the Sunni Shaitat tribe, one of Syria's largest, have destroyed ISIL's aura and broken the barrier of public fear, they said.
> 
> ...


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Aug 15, 2014)

dilloduck said:


> Hallalujah !!!   No more problems in Iraq  !!!! This will work for sure.




who said anything about no more problems in Iraq?  One major point is no Americans will be killed and wounded in Iraq and ISIL will slowly be driven out.  Just like AQI was in 2006 and 2007 was driven out when the Sunni Tribes rose up against them. 


And don't forget Iraq had no Al Qaeda problems until after Lil Dubya kicked the inspectors out and bombed and invaded Iraq to topple the government there.


----------



## Desperado (Aug 15, 2014)

Iraqi Sunnis take up arms against ISIL radicals 
If true you have to ask what took them so long


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Aug 15, 2014)

dilloduck said:


> Hallalujah !!!   No more problems in Iraq  !!!! This will work for sure.




*On 08-10-2014 at 06:48 PM Dilloduck *wrote,* "LMAO----better call your boy in from the golf course.  

*thread: &#8220;I blame Bushes for destabilizing Iraq&#8230;&#8221;


Obama can golf all he wants unless he sends US ground troops into Iraq to be killed and wounded when there are plenty of Iraqi males who should be able to fight the IS threat to their existence. 


As is reported here:

http://mawtani.al-shorfa.com/en_GB/articles/iii/features/2014/08/12/feature-01




> Operations targeting ISIL elements are still under way, with "significant progress in the western region of Anbar, especially more recently because of tribal support to the army", said ministry spokesman Maj. Gen. Mohammed al-Askari.
> 
> Forces from the army's 1st and 7th divisions and the federal police have carried out 12 military operations in Fallujah, Ramadi, al-Qaim, al-Rutbah and al-Karma since August 2nd, he told Mawtani.
> 
> ...


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Aug 15, 2014)

Desperado said:


> Iraqi Sunnis take up arms against ISIL radicals
> If true you have to ask what took them so long



Haven't you been listening to President Obama? 




> This advances the limited military objectives weve outlined in Iraq:  protecting American citizens, providing advice and assistance to Iraqi forces as they battle these terrorists, and joining with international partners to provide humanitarian aid.  But as I said when I authorized these operations, there is no American military solution to the larger crisis in Iraq.  The only lasting solution is for Iraqis to come together and form an inclusive government -- one that represents the legitimate interests of all Iraqis, and one that can unify the countrys fight against ISIL.
> 
> Today, Iraq took a promising step forward in this critical effort.   Last month, the Iraqi people named a new President.  Today, President Masum named a new Prime Minister designate, Dr. Haider al-Abadi.  Under the Iraqi constitution, this is an important step towards forming a new government that can unite Iraqs different communities.
> 
> ...




Statement by the President on Iraq | The White House


Sunni tribal leaders have seen an improvement in Baghdad.  

I think the couple hundred US Special Forces that Obama sent into Baghdad a month ago have been 're-organizing the Iraqi Army .. and a lot of US Special Forces and officers worked with these same tribal leaders during the First Anbar Awakening against AQI in 2006.  They drove AQI out of Iraq after Bush created the conditions to drive AQ in.


----------



## Ringel05 (Aug 15, 2014)

Soooooo, how much does the DNC pay you to post?


----------



## Vigilante (Aug 16, 2014)




----------



## NotfooledbyW (Aug 16, 2014)

Ringel05 said:


> Soooooo, how much does the DNC pay you to post?




So you are confirming that you have no rightwing counter to my presentation of the emerging facts that the rightwing hysteria and Obama bashing about Iraq was all for naught?

Most just run away.


----------



## kiwiman127 (Aug 16, 2014)

Desperado said:


> Iraqi Sunnis take up arms against ISIL radicals
> If true you have to ask what took them so long



As long as Shiite Maliki was in power and disfranchising the Sunni, the Sunni were not going to come to help out.
Tiny Dancer discounted the notion that Maliki's actions against the Sunni had anything to do with the Sunni joining ranks with the ISIS.  But in fact it had everything to do with the Sunni/ISIS connection.
He's gone and now the Sunni are willing to battle the ISIS.  Still there is Shiite resistance to this.  I guess the some of Shiite would rather be slaughtered/ lose their country than to work cooperatively with the Sunni for the good of their country.  They must of learned that from the US and the deep, deep polarization between the Democrats and Republicans which is seriously hurting the USA.


----------



## Sallow (Aug 16, 2014)

Desperado said:


> Iraqi Sunnis take up arms against ISIL radicals
> If true you have to ask what took them so long



They were probably waiting for Mailaki to get the boot.


----------



## tinydancer (Aug 16, 2014)

NotfooledbyW said:


> August 15, 2014 Headline out of Iran:
> 
> *Iraqi Sunnis take up arms against ISIL radicals*  Friday, August 15, 2014 10:18 PM
> 
> ...



I've never said all Sunnis were ISIL. I am very careful with words. 

I never said that Sunnis were not disenfranchised by Maliki. 

I said ISIS and their invasion had nothing to do with Sunni disenfranchisement.

Don't lie and put words up that are not mine. I don't take kindly to it.


----------



## tinydancer (Aug 16, 2014)

kiwiman127 said:


> Desperado said:
> 
> 
> > Iraqi Sunnis take up arms against ISIL radicals
> ...



Liar. I never discounted that the Sunni's in Iraq who did nothing to assist the Iraqi troops or joined ISIS once they invaded didn't have a hard on for Maliki or his ruling party.

I have maintained a consistent position that ISIS and Levant now IS have only one motivation. To form a Caliphate and to seize as much territory as possible.

Their motivations have absolutely nothing to do with the internal conflicts within the Iraqi government.

You are blatantly lying about my position.


----------



## tinydancer (Aug 16, 2014)

Sallow said:


> Desperado said:
> 
> 
> > Iraqi Sunnis take up arms against ISIL radicals
> ...



Actually, I think the Iraqi Sunnis are coordinating with the Sunni Shaitat tribe in Syria who have just launched a major offensive against IS in Syria.

That's the largest Sunni tribe in Syria.


----------



## irosie91 (Aug 16, 2014)

tinydancer said:


> kiwiman127 said:
> 
> 
> > Desperado said:
> ...




oh----gee-----tiny,   you expressed yourself well.       In fact I do agree with you for the first time 
in my life.     So many people do not understand the   PULL OF  ****THE CALIPHATE**** 
upon the hearts of muslims of all stripe.     Good of you to set them straight------however---
not all will ADMIT it-------There are  CALIPHATE DENIERS in the world -----just as there are  
HOLOCAUST DENIERS

                       "caliphate----wats dat???"     "who me"???    

For those who do not know  "caliphate"   is not an issue of dispute between shia and sunni-----
it is just  WHO GETS TO BE THE CALIPH.


----------



## kiwiman127 (Aug 16, 2014)

tinydancer said:


> kiwiman127 said:
> 
> 
> > Desperado said:
> ...



So, you never posted this?
From: *Iraq told us to LEAVE "their" country - PERIOD!* Post# 68.
"Oh cut the bloody crap that this is about Sunni disenfranchisement. That's a pantload"
http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/370341-iraq-told-us-to-leave-their-country-period-5.html


----------



## tinydancer (Aug 16, 2014)

Now for all you wanker Obamabots who live and die to praise your Messiah. Get your facts straight.

Maliki stepped aside because the grand Ayatollah of Iran came out and endorsed publicly the newly appointed Prime Minister.

The Iraqi Sunni tribes are turning on ISIL because of blood not politcs just as the largest Syrian Sunni tribe has mounted an offensive. Blood is the reason. 

Just because you fools live and die by your politcs does not mean the rest of the world does.

Here you go you assholes.

*Sunni tribe rises up against ISIL in Syria
2014-08-15 By Waleed Abu al-Khair in Cairo 






Members of the Sunni Shaitat tribe, one of Syria's largest, gather in al-Kashkiyeh in Deir Ezzor province after announcing an uprising against ISIL. [Photo courtesy of Mohieddine al-Aqidi]*

Sunni tribe rises up against ISIL in Syria | Mawtani

And in Iraq Obamabot wankers the reason is blood as well. Not fucking politics. 

* "This popular revolution was agreed on with all the tribes" that want to fight ISIL, "which spilled our blood", said Sheikh Abdul Jabbar Abu Reesha, one of the leaders of the uprising. *

Iraq Sunni tribes take up arms against ISIL | Al-Shorfa


----------



## kiwiman127 (Aug 16, 2014)

tinydancer said:


> Now for all you wanker Obamabots who live and die to praise your Messiah. Get your facts straight.
> 
> Maliki stepped aside because the grand Ayatollah of Iran came out and endorsed publicly the newly appointed Prime Minister.
> 
> ...



Iran had also been public with their dissatisfaction with Maliki because he disfranchised the Sunnis which they contended contributed to Sunni support of ISIS.
Secondly, any regular reader of my post knows that I certainly am not a Obama apologist.


----------



## dilloduck (Aug 16, 2014)

Sunni and Shia--fighting side by side to destroy the caliphate. Who woulda figured ?


----------



## kiwiman127 (Aug 16, 2014)

Iraq was very secular for several decades, they used to exist in harmony.  So it would new nothing new for them.
Right now any resistance is from the Shiites within the Iraqi Parliament, who want to continue control of the Iraqi government.


----------



## tinydancer (Aug 16, 2014)

kiwiman127 said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> > kiwiman127 said:
> ...



Yes I did in response directly to your claim:



> One of the main reasons the ISIS spilled over into Iraq



ISIS didn't spill over the border. It was an invasion. A full blown invasion. ISIS/Levant/IS has nothing to do with Sunni disenfranchisement. Nothing at all.

And certainly some Sunnis joined in the action. Jihad runs thru their blood. But the tribal elders had made a tenuous agreement with ISIS in both Syria and Iraq that ISIS broke.

Nothing to do with Maliki in Syria either. And their taking up of arms now has to do with blood spilled not politics.

Hard as that might be for an Obamabot to grasp that the whole world doesn't live and breathe Obama's every move and whim and wish; it's only about the broken agreement and spilled blood.

*The recent clashes between ISIL gunmen and fighters from the Sunni Shaitat tribe, one of Syria's largest, have destroyed ISIL's aura and broken the barrier of public fear, they said.

Violent clashes broke out at the end of July in rural Deir Ezzor after ISIL detained three tribesmen in a move the Shaitat viewed as violating an agreement which stipulated they would not be attacked.

The incident breached an agreement between ISIL and the Shaitat in which the tribesmen agreed to surrender their weapons and renounce fighting ISIL in exchange for the safety of the local population, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said. *

Sunni tribe rises up against ISIL in Syria | Mawtani


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Aug 16, 2014)

tinydancer said:


> I've never said all Sunnis were ISIL. I am very careful with words.
> 
> I never said that Sunnis were not disenfranchised by Maliki.
> 
> ...




I quoted you. You were not careful with words here at all.


*On 08-10-2014 at 11:13 AM tinydancer *wrote,* "What a fucking pantload. This has nothing at all to do with Sunni disenchantment with a Shia government. ISIS couldn't give a rats ass about who is in power in Baghdad."


You merged the two groups together.


When you say "ISIS and their invasion had nothing to do with Sunni disenfranchisement" you could not be more wrong or oblivious to reality.


----------



## irosie91 (Aug 16, 2014)

NotfooledbyW said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> > I've never said all Sunnis were ISIL. I am very careful with words.
> ...



interesting point-------are they MERGING in Iraq?     I mean are the shia and the sunnis 
singing  KUMBAYA in the caliphate?    ---------uhm    BAGHDADI is a sunni-----right??????
      well...is he?          will Iran impose a  SHIITE CALIPH?-------
      I have a feeling that  chess is based on the   SHIITE CALIPH ----against the SUNNI 
      CALIPH.........        what are the pawns supposed to be?

     Now that the world has a  CALIPHATE-----is there going to be a caliphate 
     culture?         caliphate art?     caliphate music?     caliphate cuisine?  

                                       caliwood -----like  bollywood


----------



## tinydancer (Aug 16, 2014)

NotfooledbyW said:


> tinydancer said:
> 
> 
> > I've never said all Sunnis were ISIL. I am very careful with words.
> ...





Put down the bong. I've never merged Mohammed six pack Sunni with ISIS and Levant. That's a flat out lie.

And you are completely delusional if you truly believe ISIS invaded Iraq to "make it better for the Sunni population" under the Iraqi government.

Give it up and stop making a fool of yourself.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Aug 16, 2014)

*In (*) Post 7 on 08-12-2014 at 05:18 PM tinydancer wrote*, _"And remember now. There is no such thing as a military solution. These are just poor misguided souls who feel disenfranchised.  The worst of it all is that the morons in Washington really believe this." _  See(*)thread:  &#8220;So Obabble thinks we can negotiate peace&#8221;.

Here again TinyDancer has not chosen her words carefully because :

*(A) *Obama has not claimed there is 'no such thing as a military solution'. The President of the United States has said there is no *U.S.* military solution. There is a huge difference in meaning when TinyDancer left out a critical part of the White House's statements accidently on purpose. 

(B) There is a military solution for the Iraqis and it will involve the Sunnis that we are now seeing taking up arms against ISIS as they did against AQI in 2006. 

(C) Non-ISIS Sunnis in Iraq were indeed disenfranchised and that is who the White House and everybody else on the planet has been talking about. 

(D) TinyDancer refers to people in Washington to be 'morons' for believing that the Sunnis in Iraq are disenfranchised. 

(E) No one has been saying that IS terrorist scum are doing this because they are disenfranchised. Yet TineDancer appears to have twisted US policy statements to make it seem that they did. 



*Now today at 12:40 PM TinyDancer wrote in Post 4 here*, "ISIS/Levant/IS has nothing to do with Sunni disenfranchisement."  

This is apparently because she has been forced by events on the ground to change her tune somewhat from what she wrote just four days ago:

"These are just poor misguided souls who feel disenfranchised.  The worst of it all is* that the morons in Washington really believe this*" -tinydancer. 

What a fast 'flip-flop' and notice that today Tinydancer at 11:53 AM has started this line of partisan argumentation, "And in Iraq Obamabot wankers the reason is blood as well. Not fucking politics." as she posts the same exact link that I posted yesterday at 09:13 PM. 

Proving that TinyDancer is wrong is very simple. The IS caliphate is led by an Iraqi with roots in AQI, Al Qaeda in Iraq which goes back prior to 2008 when political conditions changed the Bush 'political/military policy not to deal or unite with the Sunni Tribal leaders in their fight with AQI.

In fact up until 2006 the US policy in Iraq was to hinder not support the Sunni Tribes trying to resist al Qaeda when the moved in during the mess that Bush created in Iraq with Saddam's removal. That 
politic's changed with the Anbar Awakening and Sunnis succeeded in driving AQ out of Anbar and other areas while the US surge was more devoted to driving AQ and Shiite renegade militias out of Baghdad. 

So sure there was  'bad blood' back in 2006 between the Sunni Tribes but it was politics which enabled the Sunni Tribes to do something about it. 

So it is recently in Iraq. The politics in Bagdad will enable the tribal leaders to called the men to fight knowing perhaps they have the support of the politicians in Baghdad.  Otherwise fighting is a death sentence because the IS Terrorists came with heavy weapons this time.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Aug 16, 2014)

tinydancer said:


> Give it up and stop making a fool of yourself.



I have been citing your exact words. I have not made any errors in citing you. On the other hand you are putting things in quotes that I never wrote:

*On 08-16-2014 at 03:39 PM tinydancer wrote*, "And you are completely delusional if you truly believe ISIS invaded Iraq to "make it better for the Sunni population" under the Iraqi government."

I have never argued that the IS terrorist army invaded Iraq to make it better for the Sunni population. Where on earth did you come up with that?

At least when I say I am quoting you, I am quoting you.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Aug 16, 2014)

tinydancer said:


> Maliki stepped aside because the grand Ayatollah of Iran came out and endorsed publicly the newly appointed Prime Minister.




Just six days ago you were singing a different tune saying that Iran was aiding Maliki:

*On 08-10-2014 at 07:04 PM Tinydancer (*) wrote*, "Maliki asked for strikes against them a year ago. Assad and *Iran *and now Russia have come to his aid. 

(*)thread: "I blame Bushes for destabilizing Iraq."


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Aug 17, 2014)

*On 08-16-2014 at 11:19 AM Tinydancer wrote*, "I have maintained a consistent position that ISIS and Levant now IS have only one motivation. To form a Caliphate and to seize as much territory as possible. <para> Their motivations have absolutely nothing to do with the internal conflicts within the Iraqi government." 

No one including the Obama Administration has argued against or for what the IS killer's motivations are. The Obama Administration has expressed concern about Iraq's political situation hindering the military action it would take to defeat and eliminate the IS threat.  That military solution includes the Sunnis, that are not aligned with building the IS caliphate, joining the Iraqi Government's fight . 

Below is Tinydancer's deceptive word games as part of the clever distortion and mockery of the Administration's position:

*In (*) Post 7 on 08-12-2014 at 05:18 PM tinydancer wrote,* "And remember now. There is no such thing as a military solution. These are just poor misguided souls who feel disenfranchised. The worst of it all is that the morons in Washington really believe this." See(*)thread: &#8220;So Obabble thinks we can negotiate peace&#8221;.


Tinydancer claims that on 08-12-2014 at 05:18 PM she is talking about IS terrorists being disenfranchised. But she is mocking and condemning Obama for saying non-IS Iraqi Sunnis are the ones that are disenfranchised. 

This is how right-wing anti-Obama propaganda works. All should be aware of it.


----------

