Are We Ready For The Fall Of Baghdad?- The US Embassy?

[BullKurtz]

Baghdad falls after the Midterm shellacking

Bookmark it

Nah, Obozo won't bring Force of Arms back into Iraq UNTIL the midterms are over. He's going to amnesty 12M illegals and will use Iraq as cover to placate the GOP. Code Pink won't matter to him after next Tuesday.

Hmm, he turned control of Syria and almost all of Iraq over to ISIS, I doubt keeping Baghdad free is in Obama's plans

He has his "Nobel Peace Prize" to think about. Baghdad won't fail whether Obozo does anything or not....Sadr's militia and loyal Iraqi troops will keep that from happening....and if it got close, Iran would intervene to save southern Iraqi shia. And remember this, the Pentagon/CIA has about had it with the Kenyan....they could create a scenario where the new Iraqi government could call for help and offer a new SOF we can't refuse. I expect we'll need to keep troops in Iraq for the next 30 years.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Listen to far right loons honk.

Wow!

 

[NotfooledbyW]

JS 10079324

NotfooledbyW does not understand the cultural dynamics of Afghanistan and or the inherit weakness of American military strength in that country.

I do understand that JakeStarkey won't commit to a date when he thinks the Taliban will retake control of Afghanistan. The insurgents have been going steadily backwards (losing ground and leaders and fighters since 2010. That is when General Petraeus advised that the momentum the Taliban had under Bush was reversed under Obama. US troops are no longer on the front lines - there role is to support and train government and backup the army and police if the Taliban ever try to overwhelm government forces by sheer numbers. When the insurgents try to mass together for a major assault they are chopped up by US air power.

The future in Afghanistan has little now to do with US military strength. Its about training and the will of the people to resist the Taliban's uncivilized ways.

 

[JakeStarkey]

dumb butt never asked for a date so don't go there, silly butt

As long as we maintain a garrison in the capitol, the Taliban will rule the countryside

When we leave, the capitol will fall . . . again

Much of the people support the Taliban

We have Islamic acquaintances here in SLC who have lived her for a decade or more who don't see Malala as the hero we do, and I gather that is not unusual among the Islamic world

Muslims are not Christians, and we are very foolish to believe they will react like we would

 

[HenryBHough]

Foolish to believe that anyone in SLC might react as would Christians.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Lot of far right wing social con fundamentalist freaks here, Henry.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

JS 10082765

Much of the people support the Taliban

NATO and its partners’ 13-year engagement with Afghanistan has resulted in capable and confident Afghan National Security Forces that are in the lead for all combat operations and have the support of the Afghan people. With Resolute Support, this commitment continues as they assume full security responsibility in line with what was agreed upon with Afghan authorities at the NATO Summits in Lisbon, Chicago, and Wales.

http://www.isaf.nato.int/images/media/PDFs/20141016 isaf to rs trifold web p1 (final).pdf



I think you are wrong if your 'much of the people' is anywhere close to a majority. I cite the NATO source above. But I confirm their accuracy in reporting by understanding a major cultural shift and a recent development. The shift since 2001 is the millions if girls that attend school. That is defiance of the Taliban - not support. And that defiance has to extend through millions of family members. The recent development was the high turnout in the last national election. Those who voted defied the Taliban who vowed to disrupt it. The Taliban failed to disrupt it

Now what do you base your high opinion that the Taliban have the 'support of many people'?

 

[JakeStarkey]

You sound just like the pacification and Vietnamization propaganda from fifty years ago.

This, to, will fail, because the Afghans are not western Christians.

Culture and history is against you, podjo.

They want all our toys without our culture.

 

[JakeStarkey]

You sound just like the pacification and Vietnamization propaganda from fifty years ago.

This, to, will fail, because the Afghans are not western Christians.

Culture and history is against you, podjo.

They want all our toys without our culture.

And you have been co-opted without even realizing it.

 

[Katzndogz]

You tube will have the hanging of our ambassador on line.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Let's hope not.

 

[Roadrunner]

It has become clear Obama is over matched at every juncture. The man has an impressive resume of failures to weigh him and America down

-Geaux

-------------------

I recently was in Vietnam and spent some time in prosperous, capitalist Saigon, now called Ho Chi Minh City, and toured the American War Museum. I believe there are a number of parallels between the Vietnam and Iraq War and that history could repeat itself now in Baghdad. Who can forget the former Vietnamese supporters of America being left behind as the last helicopter left the roof of the US embassy?

Hence the ISIS advance in Anbar province to just outside the airport is a direct threat to the Green Zone because their forces will be moving through predominantly Sunni neighborhoods all the way east to the American embassy. They could but surprisingly have not attempted to shut down the airport and here is where the situation gets interesting. Late this week, the Iraq army leadership basically said that unless US forces arrive to help them defend the western approaches to the city, they will throw down their weapons and go home – and I believe they will.

The scenario I see is the first attack will likely be against the most heavily defended target, the US embassy and the Green Zone. The ISIS fighters are not strong enough to take the heavily fortified green zone by direct assault and so it will probably fail.

The US will then attempt to fly in reinforcements to the airport and this will be when ISIS will start mortar fire and attempt to close the Baghdad airport as well as attack any convoys through the Sunni neighborhoods heading to the Green Zone. They will likely be able to shut down the airport, thus forcing reinforcements and embassy staff leaving to use helicopters for transportation to airfields further south in Iraq or maybe even to Kuwait. Closing the airport will be a major public relations victory for ISIS.

A siege of the Green Zone and American embassy will likely then take place and the US will be forced to destroy by air the Sunni neighborhoods surrounding the area from the zone west to the airport at a minimum resulting in heavy Sunni civilian causalities. Once again, more bad PR for the United States.

Eventually, the US may well be forced to close the embassy and withdraw from the Green Zone, which will result in videos that remind the American public of the Saigon collapse back on April 30, 1975. This would be a tremendous PR victory for the extremists, resulting in more fighter recruits.

Finally, if the US is forced to withdraw from their fortified embassy then, of course, ISIS will take over America's largest embassy in the world. Note, this embassy compound can hold 35,000 American personnel and is basically a small city-state within Baghdad that is massively defended.

Are We Ready For The Fall Of Baghdad Zero Hedge

We survived the fall of Saigon, we will survive the fall of Baghdad.

And Ankara.

And Cairo.

And Teheran.

You get the drift, the Caliphate is coming, and, it really doesn't mean shit.

They will be too busy settling scores to think of us for decades.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Just so. And we keep working on energy independence and retraining our neo-cons for service in the fast food industry.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

BK 10079795

I expect we'll need to keep troops in Iraq for the next 30 years

Why? Have you heard Iraq's new Sunni Defense Minister talk as if he thinks Iraq needs US ground troops for thirty years. If he gets the Sunni tribal leaders committed to wiping out the IS terrorist invasion and they get some of Iraq's heavy weapons - they will never need US combat troops to fight the terrorist killers rapists and thieves.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Rr 10083293

And Cairo

The IS killers, rapists and thieves could not hold the Mosul Dam; they could not take the Baijii refinery; a plane load of Peshmerga will wipe out their assault at Kobane and you have them taking Tehran and Cairo.

If you wish to look at the future of IS terrorists in all the Middle East you best figure out that a consensus is building that the terrorists have already been stopped from advancing beyond what they have already taken. Reversing what the terrorists have taken is now where the battles will be waged.

Best updated commentary on the status of IS terrorists in Iraq and Syria. They are no going to Cairo Baghdad or Tehran to capture and control those capitols. That is about as nutty as anyone can be.

By Paul Crompton | Al Arabiya News
Friday, 31 October 2014
U.S.-led airstrikes and steadily strengthening forces in Iraq are containing advances by the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, but are by no means destroying it, experts told Al Arabiya News.

ISIS’s inability to take the Syrian Kurdish town of Kobane after an offensive lasting a month and a half, and its routing from two Iraqi towns earlier this week, are evidence that its many opponents are beginning to contain the group, analysts said.

“There’s no question that the airstrikes are containing ISIS,” said Hilal Khashan, political science professor at the American University of Beirut, adding that the U.S-led coalition appeared to have the edge in the “war of attrition.”

Michael Knights, a fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, said in the face of an increasingly credible opposition - mainly from Kurdish forces and Iraqi government troops - ISIS is unable to make significant new gains.
“ISIS has failed to hold ground wherever Iraqi and Kurdish troops pushed forward in a determined way, particularly when they received U.S. air support,” Knights said.

Matthew Hoh, a fellow at the U.S.-based Center for International Policy, said while ISIS enjoys considerable support within its own Sunni-majority areas, the recent small loss of territory and apparent inability to expand further is down to a “limitation on its ability to control territory outside of its own sect.”

Michael Ryan, a scholar at the Washington-based Middle East Institute, said without the support of Sunni tribes in Iraq, ISIS is likely to lose its foothold.

“The U.S. coalition needs to work on quietly winning over the Sunni Arab tribes as much as any other measure it’s currently pursuing,” Ryan said.

Last Update: Friday, 31 October 2014 KSA 17:44 - GMT 14:44

http://english.alarabiya.net/en/per...S-gains-halted-but-defeat-not-on-horizon.html

 

[BullKurtz]

I do understand that JakeStarkey won't commit to a date when he thinks the Taliban will retake control of Afghanistan. The insurgents have been going steadily backwards (losing ground and leaders and fighters since 2010. That is when General Petraeus advised that the momentum the Taliban had under Bush was reversed under Obama. US troops are no longer on the front lines - there role is to support and train government and backup the army and police if the Taliban ever try to overwhelm government forces by sheer numbers. When the insurgents try to mass together for a major assault they are chopped up by US air power.

The future in Afghanistan has little now to do with US military strength. Its about training and the will of the people to resist the Taliban's uncivilized ways.

You're not current or ex-military and don't know what the terms being used here mean. If the Taliban was doing so well when Dubya was CIC, how did all those roads and schools for girls get built before the Kenyan stumbled into the WH? The majority of those girls no longer go to school because they will have acid thrown in their faces if they dared. The Taliban has had free rein since the stinkin queer Obozo took office....his ROE's (rules of engagement) dictate US Troop CAN NOT FIRE UNLESS FIRED UPON. Got any idea what that does to the concept of an ambush? Got any idea what that means if a U.S. patrol encounters a Taliban patrol when Terry knows the GIs can't fire first? You got your head in the clouds, citing numbers that have no correlation to the facts on the ground. Will Kabul fall? Not now that we have the SOF that Karzai would never agree to. Who runs the rest of the Stan?....the Taliban.

 

[BullKurtz]

Why? Have you heard Iraq's new Sunni Defense Minister talk as if he thinks Iraq needs US ground troops for thirty years. If he gets the Sunni tribal leaders committed to wiping out the IS terrorist invasion and they get some of Iraq's heavy weapons - they will never need US combat troops to fight the terrorist killers rapists and thieves.

Stop addressing me....you have no idea what I or youself is talking about.

For anybody here who understands asymmetrical warfare and counter-insurgency tactics, it's well understood that after a cessation of hostilities, an occupying force is necessary to maintain order. How long have we been in Japan and Germany? We are still in S. Korea 60 years after the ceasefire was signed. I don't think a 30 year presence in Iraq is asking too much of us or the Iraqis and after ISIL is defeated at great cost, neither will either side.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

The Taliban has had free rein since the stinkin queer Obozo took office

If that were true why did General Petraeus say in 2010 ttat the momentum the Taliban had the previous several years was reversed.

That means the Taliban had free rein prior to 2019, not the other way around.

 

[Flopper]

Will Obama let ISIS burn the American flag and raise the black flag of death at the US Embassy?

-Geaux

A month ago, ISIS’s advance looked unstoppable. Now it’s been stopped.

Watching the news, you could be forgiven for thinking that ISIS is an unstoppable juggernaut, sweeping Iraq and Syria in an unending, unstoppable, terrible blitzkrieg.

But you'd be wrong. The truth is that ISIS's momentum is stalled: in both Iraq and Syria, the group is being beaten back at key points. There are initial signs — uncertain, sketchy, but hopeful — that the group is hurting more than you may think, and has stalled out in the war it was for so long winning. ISIS isn't close to being destroyed. But they are reeling.

A month ago ISIS s advance looked unstoppable. Now it s been stopped. - Vox

 

[Flopper]

I say hitting them from air and supporting Kurdish and Iraq forces is the right move for now. After the midterms, I think we're going to see increasing numbers of US advisers moving into Iraq. If that doesn't do it then I think we will start sending US Special Forces, slowly at first but increasing over the coming months. Australia has agreed to send 200 special forces troops to fight along side Iraqi troops. The UK and a dozen other countries have committed a few troops and air support, but you can bet that will increase once the US starts putting some boots on the ground. These countries are not going to make any real commitment until the US does.