Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

2014 Iraq Conflict [Opinion & Analysis]

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

EVERYONE COPY, PASTE, AND SPREAD ABU HADI'S WORDS

 

What all have to understand is that this is part of a plan launched by the US/Europe in 2003 to make Iraq a divided country (divided into Iraqi Kurdistan in the North, A Takfiri State in the areas of Mosul / Tikrit, and A Shia state in the South). This would benefit the West tremendously since three smaller states with their Takfiri buddies in the Middle, would be easier to control and would be easier for them to snatch the natural resources, most importantly the oil. This is the plan and it is clear to me now, since since Wed, all you hear on the Western Media is about a 'sectarian' conflict and 'wouldn't it be better if Iraq were divided into three states'. So I suggest that

 

1) Iraq not cooperate with the US in any way, not take assitance from them. Rely on local forces and resources

2) For those outside Iraq, immediately stop listening to non Islamic English language news regarding the conflict, as they are all being fed from the same source (Reuters/AP) and do not know anything about what is going on and they are being given a script by the NSA / Mi6 to read which they will read, whether it is true or not. 

3) For those inside Iraq, it is your duty to support the just leadership of Sayid Sistani(may Allah strengthen his back and give him long life) and if you are Sunni, and you care a lick about your country, it is your duty to support your leadership that is not aligned with the Takfiri thugs (ISIS and Al Nusra) and if you don't trust them, at least stay out of the conflict.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

To all those who opposes the army Iraq, especially some of the Sunnis on this thread:

 

Brother Ibn Sohan already posted this video, but I want to bump it again because it's really important. 

 

Sunni scholars from Basrah have voiced their support for the Iraqi national army yesterday in fighting the ISIS. Note that these aren't just any turban heads who came on TV or a minority Sufi like sect. I am from Basrah, and I am well aware who these people are, especially considering the fact that half of my family are Sunni and are heavily associated with them. These are the Sunni leaders of the Islamic council that represents almost all Sunnis in Basrah, and surrounding areas(Zubayr, Safwan ect). The second man from left especially is the Imam of Masjid Al-Kawaz; one of the largest Sunni Masajids in Basrah. 

 

 

 

With that being said, it has become apparent and clear that there are two sides in this game; the Iraqi army(which the majority of the Iraqis are supporting including Sunnis) and the Takfiri ISIS blood shedding Kaffir terrorists that also destroyed Syria. Who ever picks the side of the latter, is a traitor and enemy of not all Iraqis, but Islam in general. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Iran has sent 2,000 advance troops to Iraq in the past 48 hours to help tackle a jihadist insurgency, a senior Iraqi official has told the Guardian.

 

 

 

 

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/14/iran-iraq-isis-fight-militants-nouri-maliki?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I'm sure he was calling David66 a troll, not you.

 

I'm sure he was calling David66 a troll, not you.

Well then I will have to apologize

 

dude he's a troll

Sorry for misinterpreting your comment and yes it seemed so :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

This is how it needs to be done and it will be done, death penalty for criminal Baathists and those who support them... and no single Takfiri should see the darkness of a prison... they must be shot in broad daylight.

 

In an address to military commanders in Samaara, al-Maliki warned that army deserters could face the death penalty if they don't report back to their units. But he insisted the crisis had a silver lining. 

 

"This is our chance to clean and purge the army from these elements that only want to make gains from being in the army and police," he said. "They thought that this ist he beginning of the end but, in fact, we say that this is the beginning of their end and defeat."  FoxNews

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Iran has sent 2,000 advance troops to Iraq in the past 48 hours to help tackle a jihadist insurgency, a senior Iraqi official has told the Guardian.

 

 

 

 

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/14/iran-iraq-isis-fight-militants-nouri-maliki?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

These newspapers are liars most of time, don't help them to spread their lies. Iraqi official?

It is enough lie to call these mercenary terrorists "Insurgents" or better "rebels".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Forum Administrators

To keep the discussions manageable, please use this thread for wider discussion/opinion and the following thread for breaking news:

 

http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235023133-iraq-conflict-2014-breaking-news-only/#entry2710408

 

Please try and minimise the extent to which new threads are created.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

These newspapers are liars most of time, don't help them to spread their lies. Iraqi official?

It is enough lie to call these mercenary terrorists "Insurgents" or better "rebels".

 

Dont tar the Guardian with the same brush that should touch 'news' papers like the Daily Mail. The Guardian has integrity in so far as any news agency can have, they have a decent track record.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

They couldn't even take damascus, what makes them think they'll take baghdad or kerbala, especially with Iraq having a dozen million more shias? Not too sure what all the panic is about. 

They have better than Damascus, they are selling electricity to the Syrian Gov.

http://www.vox.com/2014/6/12/5802824/how-isis-is-exploiting-the-economics-of-syrias-civil-war/in/5568955

 

 

 

But the group is not only following a stone-age script. It also rapidly establishes control of local resources and uses them to extend and strengthen its grip.

It has taken over oil fields in eastern Syria, for example, and according to several rebel commanders and aid workers, has resumed pumping.
 It has also secured revenue by selling electricity to the government from captured power plants
. In Iraq on Wednesday, the militants seized control of Baiji, the site of Iraq's largest oil refinery and power plant.
 

http://www.npr.org/blogs/parallels/2014/06/13/321678737/in-one-map-the-dramatic-rise-of-isis-in-iraq-and-syria

 

The ISIS looks crazy, erratic, bloody, savage, cavemen. Typical Islamists and Jihadists, too loud, few gains. But behind this fake face was their scheduled, well planned , well executed operation to capture the oil of Syria and Iraq.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Any US intervention in Iraq will lead to more chaos and will give the impression to outsiders that US is on the side of Maliki government while the fact is that these takfeeri terrorist organizations are being funded and financed by regional US allies in Middle East. The Western media is again pitching this fight as some Sunni rebellion against a Shia government like they did in Syria. The reality is the majority of Sunnis (the Kurds) have nothing to do with these terrorist groups rather they are ready to confront them. This terrorist group, ISIS, is backed up by takfeeris, former Baathist and Pro-Saddam elements of the Iraqi society and funded by regional Arab monarchies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

The funny thing is, US haven't done anything during real danger, except for promising new arms delivery to Iraq and always delaying it. Now that the Shia have risen to defend themselves the US starts to send its fleets to Iraq.

Edited by lover
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

The funny thing is, US haven't done anything during real danger, except for promising new arms delivery to Iraq and always delaying it. Now that the Shia have risen to defend themselves the US starts to send its fleets to Iraq.

US can trust wahabis with nuclear weapons but cannot trust a Shia with F16!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/kerry-says-us-will-act-soon-on-iraq-but-at-request-of-baghdad-government/2014/06/13/53ddc5f0-f2f9-11e3-9ebc-2ee6f81ed217_story.html

see above, obama was demanding a political reforms in the Iraqi gov before he offers his help agianst  ISIS. He was talking about giving the Sunnis more positions , higher positions, even if they didn't deserve it. They are also demanding that they can choose who to train. Currently, only Maliki can pick who shall be trained, Americans don't like it.

Iraq’s largely Shiite and often-abusive army.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Just a thought on Ayatollah Sistanis statement; is it asking people to just defend the shrines and the holy cities, or more offensive in nature such as to go into places like mosul and regain control?

 

They were talking about it on Karbala TV and they were talking about how it is our duty to eliminate the threat and protect our country so I think regaining control of Mosul and surrounding areas is definitely encouraged as they are holy places and a part of our country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

The Mahdi Army. Just hearing this name gives me chills.  ~ Ya Ali!  A.S

Century after century, the enemies of the Ahlulbayt fail to realize our immense power, that comes just from chanting Ya Hussain A.S. We are unstoppable. The more you kill us, the more strength we gain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Forum Administrators

Patrick Cockburn (this time):

 

The Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps is now moving into Baghdad to reorganise a new military force that would combine elements of the old military and the militias, some of which are already under Iranian control. The aim of this would be to hold Baghdad and probably a line to the north through mixed Sunni-Shia provinces such as Diyala and cities including Samarra with its Shia shrine, destruction of which in 2006 led to the most savage stage of the Sunni-Shia civil war.

US and Britain must work with Iran if they are to stop an extreme Sunni state emerging in north and west Iraq extending into eastern Syria.

 

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/iraq-crisis-west-must-take-up-tehrans-offer-to-block-an-isis-victory-9537866.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Does anyone else find Muqtada Al-Sadr's suggestion of a parade a bit odd? if the army is parading through the country who will be fighting? and wont openly parading make them an easier target?


My reference is this article btw: http://en.alalam.ir/news/1602836

Edited by Ruq
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

People should stop insisting on Western media sources which falsely claim that Iranian troops have or are being deployed to Iraq.  The reason why they do so is obvious; there is an information war going on at the moment to demoralise the Iraqi people, army and government and consequently to further the goals of ISIS and their sponsors (Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Israel). Therefore, these media sources falsely introduce an 'unprecedented development' - the entrance of Iranian troops as a 'desperate last measure for Iraqi's to save themselves'. What could be more demoralising than that?  The truth is the Iraqi army is very capable of rooting the terrorists out if only they are organised properly and this is certainly a wake up call for the government and their opponents to get their act together.

 

These claims are being repeatedly denied by the Iranian side. President Rouhani has said:

 

 

 

"Of course, we should know that help and assistance is one issue, and interference and entrance (into the battlefield) is another. If the Iraqi government demands us we will help them, but the entrance of the Iranian troops (onto the scene of battles in Iraq) has never been considered," the president said.

 

"Since the onset of its establishment, the Islamic Republic has never taken such measures and we have never sent our troops to another country for operations," he said, and added, "Of course, we will provide countries with our consultative views." (i.e. strategic advice, intelligence sharing, training, etc and these are more than sufficient - Hizbullah is an example)

 

Rouhani assured that the Iraqi nation is able to ward off terrorism.

Edited by MajiC
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

الحمد لله 

Momentum is building up against the insurgency in Iraq.

 

The mainstream news has been scaremongering, making ISIS seem a lot more powerful than it actually is, for example if ISIS briefly occupies an area then is cleared out, the media will report it as 'taken by ISIS' when it isn't true.

 

Tikrit was taken back early on in the insurgency yet the mainstream news is still assuming Tikrit is under ISIS.

 

Two people working for mainstream news in Baghdad have voluntarily quit after finding out the false media reporting, and have joined another news agency.

The BBC has been reporting on fake/staged pro-ISIS footage. When ISIS claim to have killed 1,700 Shia in a day its obviously exaggurated.

 

ISIS's advance has been slowed, and Iraqi forces (including the Shia militias) are beginning to retake territory. 

 

Morale is very high now.

 

My opinion:

ISIS is like a puffer fish; inflated to make itself seem a lot bigger and scarier than it actually is. But the Shia have managed to puncture it and all that's coming out is harmless Salafi air. What will remain is a weak and withered, half dead tiny fish. ISIS didn't count on Sayed Sistani (HA) to issue a single fatwa effectively mobilising an entire army with an extremely high morale. How many people on the face of this planet can mobilise an army out of thin air with high morale with a single fatwa? ISIS hoped that their strategy of aiming for sunni areas and making deals (e.g. Mosul Governor, may Allah curse him) in order that they gain a presence without fighting for it would be enough to carry the momentum to the rest of the Iraq. They were wrong.

 

I think there is a big positive outcome in this. Everyone has played their cards, and shown their true intentions; the Kurds, the moderate Sunnis of the south (may Allah protect them), the Shia, and the sunnis of Mosul and other northern provinces. Loyalties have been effectively identified. When Iraq comes out of this, I think it will come out stronger. It will be able to more effectively root out dissent, and punish the traitors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

For ISIS to claim to try and take Karbala is just absurd, and even a tactical error; I cannot think of a symbol that is more inspiring to die for on the face of this planet. People WISH to die fighting at Karbala. And when you have about 17 million Shias closeby, the fighters they send are going to severely outnumber ISIS. 

 

They wont be able to take Baghdad, nevermind Karbala. They mentioned Karbala because they hoped that the scaremongering would work to their advantage, but it has done the complete opposite and helped mobilise the Shia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

I do think now that it's not as much of a deal as it is being made out to be. I mean, after their initial advances, which were likely more due to the stupidity of the army in leaving their posts rather than the strength of ISIL, along with the element of surprise, they haven't really made any more advances and are actually losing land, to Shia militias and to the Kurds. Then, there's the fact that even with the equipment they stole, the Iraqi military still has way, way more people and weapons, along with, if the numbers other members on Shiachat have shared are accurate, 1.5-2 million Iraqi civilians who are ready to fight. There is no real danger of Baghdad falling, as I see it - then again, while I have tried to follow the news, it's much harder if you're not on the ground yourself. The army should now try to consolidate its forces, incorporate the militias that are already trained and, mostly keep the civilian volunteers out, unless they absolutely can't do without them, and, instead of the "Baghdad is going to fall" rhetoric, concentrate on pushing back and regaining lost territories. They certainly have the weapons and the manpower and even if one argues they aren't as well trained as the terrorists, these sheer numbers and better weapons should allow them to easily defend and, gradually, regain lost land. Maliki, however, should be concentrating on pacifying the Kurds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

With 1.5 million men answering the call for kifa, what does Iraq need the US for.

 

Besides, on the news in the last 24 hours, one informed commentator said that Maliki has gone to the US "hat-in-hand" to get assistance and asked for drone strikes last November (?).

 

The US has several drone bases in Saudi Arabia but these will do nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

US Defence Secretary Chuck Hagel ordered the USS George HW Bush, which carries dozens of fighter jets, to be moved from the North Arabian Sea.


bbc.

 

Rear Admiral John Kirby, the Pentagon press secretary, said the Bush will be accompanied by the guided missile cruiser USS Philippine Sea and the guided missile destroyer USS Truxton. The ships were expected to arrive in the Gulf on Saturday night.

 

Guardian.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

 

This article paints a grim picture of Iraqi military and its abuses of the Sunnis and the general failure of the Shia-led government to incorporate Sunnis into the national political process. The same has been said by Juan Cole in an article someone posted a day or two ago.

 

No one in this thread has so far said anything about the role the Shia government might have played in the alienation of the Sunnis. If Sunni tribes ally themselves with ISIS, or at least tolerate its advances, as it is said to have happened in Mosul and Tikrit, what hope there is for the Baghdad government to retake and hold the areas under ISIS control?

 

As for Iranian revolutionary guards making their way into Iraq being reported in Western press, this might well be out of thin air, but this is not an impossibility. Of course Iran won't go public about it, not at least at this initial stage, but wouldn't it be prudent for Iran to send in a detachment of its forces to, if not actually engage in direct fighting, at least guide the rabble that is Iraqi army?

 

US Defence Secretary Chuck Hagel ordered the USS George HW Bush, which carries dozens of fighter jets, to be moved from the North Arabian Sea.

bbc.
 
Rear Admiral John Kirby, the Pentagon press secretary, said the Bush will be accompanied by the guided missile cruiser USS Philippine Sea and the guided missile destroyer USS Truxton. The ships were expected to arrive in the Gulf on Saturday night.
 
Guardian.

 

 

Iraqis will need US drones.

People should stop insisting on Western media sources which falsely claim that Iranian troops have or are being deployed to Iraq.  The reason why they do so is obvious; there is an information war going on at the moment to demoralise the Iraqi people, army and government and consequently to further the goals of ISIS and their sponsors (Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Israel). Therefore, these media sources falsely introduce an 'unprecedented development' - the entrance of Iranian troops as a 'desperate last measure for Iraqi's to save themselves'. What could be more demoralising than that?  The truth is the Iraqi army is very capable of rooting the terrorists out if only they are organised properly and this is certainly a wake up call for the government and their opponents to get their act together.

 

These claims are being repeatedly denied by the Iranian side. President Rouhani has said:

 

People should stop insisting on Western media sources which falsely claim that Iranian troops have or are being deployed to Iraq.  The reason why they do so is obvious; there is an information war going on at the moment to demoralise the Iraqi people, army and government and consequently to further the goals of ISIS and their sponsors (Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Israel). Therefore, these media sources falsely introduce an 'unprecedented development' - the entrance of Iranian troops as a 'desperate last measure for Iraqi's to save themselves'. What could be more demoralising than that?  The truth is the Iraqi army is very capable of rooting the terrorists out if only they are organised properly and this is certainly a wake up call for the government and their opponents to get their act together.

 

These claims are being repeatedly denied by the Iranian side. President Rouhani has said:

 

I hope you are right about the emboldened but seeing how divisions of Iraqi army entrusted with the defence of Musul and surrounding areas left their places and surrendered the town to the terrorists, I really doubt if the Iraqi army as it is constituted currently is a good enough to liberate the occupied parts of the country. If it were, volunteers who don't even know how to fight besides firing elementary weapons will not be joining up the security en masse? It's a crisis situation for Baghdad government and they are advised to take any help which can strengthen its defences.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
(salam)

 

Very interesting way of looking at things:

 

America's Covert Re-Invasion of Iraq

 

The NEO report would also post Seymour Hersh’s 2007 article, “The Redirection,” documenting over the course of 9 pages US, Saudi, and Israeli intentions to create and deploy sectarian extremists region-wide to confront Iran, Syria, and Hezbollah in Lebanon. Hersh would note that these “sectarian extremists” were either tied to Al Qaeda, or Al Qaeda itself. The ISIS army moving toward Baghdad is the final manifestation of this conspiracy, a standing army operating with impunity, threatening to topple the Syrian government, purge pro-Iranian forces in Iraq, and even threatening Iran itself by building a bridge from Al Qaeda’s NATO safe havens in Turkey, across northern Iraq, and up to Iran’s borders directly. Labeled “terrorists” by the West, grants the West plausible deniability in its creation, deployment, and across the broad spectrum of atrocities it is now carrying out.

 

It is a defacto re-invasion of Iraq by Western interests – but this time without Western forces directly participating – rather a proxy force the West is desperately attempting to disavow any knowledge of or any connection to.

 

However, no other explanation can account for the size and prowess of ISIS beyond state sponsorship. And since ISIS is the clear benefactor of state sponsorship, the question is, which states are sponsoring it? With Iraq, Syria, and Iran along with Lebanese-based Hezbollah locked in armed struggle with ISIS and other Al Qaeda franchises across the region, the only blocs left are NATO and the GCC (Saudi Arabia and Qatar in particular).

 


 

Wassalam
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Forum Administrators

No one in this thread has so far said anything about the role the Shia government might have played in the alienation of the Sunnis. If Sunni tribes ally themselves with ISIS, or at least tolerate its advances, as it is said to have happened in Mosul and Tikrit, what hope there is for the Baghdad government to retake and hold the areas under ISIS control?

 

This smacks of blaming the victims (the Shia).

 

For the Sunnis to remain happy, things would have had to remain similar to the way that they had been under Saddam's era. But that was never on the cards was it?

 

And any move from the previous balance was always likely to start conflict, since you've got Arab states in the Persian Gulf ready and willing to pay for a war the way they did in the 1980s.

 

The 'liberation' of Iraq was primed for failure from the outset, which is why people like me were against it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

(salam)

Very interesting way of looking at things:

America's Covert Re-Invasion of Iraq

The NEO report would also post Seymour Hersh’s 2007 article, “The Redirection,” documenting over the course of 9 pages US, Saudi, and Israeli intentions to create and deploy sectarian extremists region-wide to confront Iran, Syria, and Hezbollah in Lebanon. Hersh would note that these “sectarian extremists” were either tied to Al Qaeda, or Al Qaeda itself. The ISIS army moving toward Baghdad is the final manifestation of this conspiracy, a standing army operating with impunity, threatening to topple the Syrian government, purge pro-Iranian forces in Iraq, and even threatening Iran itself by building a bridge from Al Qaeda’s NATO safe havens in Turkey, across northern Iraq, and up to Iran’s borders directly. Labeled “terrorists” by the West, grants the West plausible deniability in its creation, deployment, and across the broad spectrum of atrocities it is now carrying out.

It is a defacto re-invasion of Iraq by Western interests – but this time without Western forces directly participating – rather a proxy force the West is desperately attempting to disavow any knowledge of or any connection to.

However, no other explanation can account for the size and prowess of ISIS beyond state sponsorship. And since ISIS is the clear benefactor of state sponsorship, the question is, which states are sponsoring it? With Iraq, Syria, and Iran along with Lebanese-based Hezbollah locked in armed struggle with ISIS and other Al Qaeda franchises across the region, the only blocs left are NATO and the GCC (Saudi Arabia and Qatar in particular).

Read more of it here: http://www.infowars.com/americas-covert-re-invasion-of-iraq/

Wassalam

ISIS = Baathist .

My guess is that the US conspired with the army commanders of Saddam to make the army fall down quickly ( just like what happened in Mosul) then there will be fake elections then the sectarian war then somehow people will beg for the return of military like what happened in Egypt.

Except Iraq did not go back to first sequare.

2006 fitnah was successfully defeated with the wisdom of Ayt Sistani.

ISIS= Qaedah = Baathists . Ask the Sunni Iraqis , the Sunni Syrians , the Sunni Jordanians , ask the Bahrainis.

American wanted more Sunnis in army and they got more Sunnis ( Baathist ) in army who betrayed Iraq . Sunnis already have third of parliament seats which is more than what they actually deserve.

It is just a war lies, they want somehow to turn these animals to rebels and freedom fighters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
The 'liberation' of Iraq was primed for failure from the outset, which is why people like me were against it.

 

Yes, so was I.

 

I understand that Sunnis were likely to put up resistance to any change in their privileged sociopolitical position that they enjoyed during the Saddam era. I am, however, wondering if the policies of the Shia-led government towards the hitherto dominant Sunnis in any way alienated those Sunnis who did not want to come into conflict with the post-Saddam order?

 

Anyone knowledgeable about the inner workings of the Iraqi politics who can give a brief review of govt policies towards the Sunnis and list valid Sunni grievances (if any) and their popularity among the Sunnis?

 

I have a hard time believing that most Sunnis of Iraq are so extremist and anti-Shia that they would help or even condone the advances of a brutal Takfiri mercenary force which in time will also devour those Sunnis who don't sign up to its program of a 'terror caliphate' with expansionist ideas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Forum Administrators
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...