• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Iraq Seeks To Cancel Security Agreement With US, Will Invite Russia To Fight ISIS

DA60

DA60

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2012
Messages
16,386
Reaction score
7,793
Location
Where I am now
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
'Now, in the latest example of just how tenuous Washington’s grip on the region has become, the Iraqi parliament's Security and Defense Committee is calling for the review and cancellation of Baghdad’s security agreement with the US.

“The government and parliament need to review the agreement signed with the United States on security because the United States does not seriously care about its fulfillment,” committee member Hamid al-Mutlaq, a senior Sunni lawmaker told Sputnik on Wednesday. “We demand that it be annulled,” he added.

Who will fill the void you ask? You guessed it:

Putin_0_0.png


"Soon, a meeting [of the committee] with Prime Minister Haider Abadi will be held, at which we will propose cooperating with Russia in carrying out airstrikes against IS and in the fight against terrorism in Iraq," another committee member said earlier this week.'

Iraq Seeks To Cancel Security Agreement With US, Will Invite Russia To Fight ISIS | Zero Hedge


I cannot find a 'well known, respected' source for this...but it IS interesting and I have heard rumblings of this before.


Thoughts?
 
If this is completely accurate, it will end the debate on how well Putin has outplayed Obama on the international stage.
 
OrphanSlug said:
If this is completely accurate, it will end the debate on how well Putin has outplayed Obama on the international stage.
Click to expand...

The Iraq "government" seems to be very worried about the Kurds. Why they worry more about the Kurds than Iran or Russia is not logical to me but that seems to be the case. Obama, with mere months in office left, is not even pretending to play any more. His "strategy" is simply to mark time and focus on climate change - the "real" immediate threat.
 
Awesome, US policy has created the mess. Makes sense that people want us out.
 
OrphanSlug said:
If this is completely accurate, it will end the debate on how well Putin has outplayed Obama on the international stage.
Click to expand...

It will also end the debate on how well Bush's invasion and occupation of Iraq was for the region and the world. ;)
 
ttwtt78640 said:
The Iraq "government" seems to be very worried about the Kurds. Why they worry more about the Kurds than Iran or Russia is not logical to me but that seems to be the case. Obama, with mere months in office left, is not even pretending to play any more. His "strategy" is simply to mark time and focus on climate change - the "real" immediate threat.
Click to expand...

Iraq doesn't buy the Iranian and Russian propaganda peddled by the US state department, that's for patronizing Americans.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
The Iraq "government" seems to be very worried about the Kurds. Why they worry more about the Kurds than Iran or Russia is not logical to me but that seems to be the case. Obama, with mere months in office left, is not even pretending to play any more. His "strategy" is simply to mark time and focus on climate change - the "real" immediate threat.
Click to expand...

I would find that odd. Given what ISIS has accomplished inside Iraq, it seems nonsensical to then look to the Kurds (as to help them in temp ally format, or worry about them for some other reason.) And we should not forget that when ISIS really took root in Iraq, it ended up being the Kurds more or less left out in the cold to defend themselves.

I would guess this boils down to who is most likely to be indiscriminate in attacking all things not al-Assad in Syria or Iraqi Government. It turns out Russia is willing to attack more, more frequently, and go after infrastructure... while the US is still running around with an air campaign that is questionable in its effectiveness. Driven by intel on specific targets so some gains, some not so much. We have been at this a while with ISIS to questionable results. Russia could not care any less who they hit, civilians included.

On that level I can see the Iraqi Government willing to talk to Putin. I would see ISIS as the real threat to any government in the region, and they all do not like competition. That is more or less confirmed by how the current Iraqi government has treated both the Kurds and all other opposition to date.

This is going to be interesting if true, seeing how Putin comes into Iraq as he has into Syria presumably against the same targets.
 
Montecresto said:
It will also end the debate on how well Bush's invasion and occupation of Iraq was for the region and the world. ;)
Click to expand...

I agree, another disaster that turned into yet another disaster. That sums up our greater Middle East foreign policy to date.
 
OrphanSlug said:
I agree, another disaster that turned into yet another disaster. That sums up our greater Middle East foreign policy to date.
Click to expand...

Yep, good summary. I actually do hope if Russia accepts the invitation (don't know that they have the resources to maintain their national security at home, resist NATO expansion eastward, come to their ally's aid in Syria, and help the Iraqis out too) that they are successful in restoring security to Iraq.
 
OrphanSlug said:
I would find that odd. Given what ISIS has accomplished inside Iraq, it seems nonsensical to then look to the Kurds (as to help them in temp ally format, or worry about them for some other reason.) And we should not forget that when ISIS really took root in Iraq, it ended up being the Kurds more or less left out in the cold to defend themselves.

I would guess this boils down to who is most likely to be indiscriminate in attacking all things not al-Assad in Syria or Iraqi Government. It turns out Russia is willing to attack more, more frequently, and go after infrastructure... while the US is still running around with an air campaign that is questionable in its effectiveness. Driven by intel on specific targets so some gains, some not so much. We have been at this a while with ISIS to questionable results. Russia could not care any less who they hit, civilians included.

On that level I can see the Iraqi Government willing to talk to Putin. I would see ISIS as the real threat to any government in the region, and they all do not like competition. That is more or less confirmed by how the current Iraqi government has treated both the Kurds and all other opposition to date.

This is going to be interesting if true, seeing how Putin comes into Iraq as he has into Syria presumably against the same targets.
Click to expand...

Maybe, but I see the biggest difference as who supports frequent regime change or "democracy" and who is willing to let puppets be puppets and keep a decent cut of the national booty. These are oil based economy states and Obama is anti-oil which is also presents problems.
 
Montecresto said:
Yep, good summary. I actually do hope if Russia accepts the invitation (don't know that they have the resources to maintain their national security at home, resist NATO expansion eastward, come to their ally's aid in Syria, and help the Iraqis out too) that they are successful in restoring security to Iraq.
Click to expand...

The ironic part is, if Bush 43 was succeeded by another like-minded Republican... there would already be boots on the ground in Iraq (probably never left in the first place) and we would be pushing ISIS to the border of Syria. The problem is we would have even more military loss of life, our resources would be further strained, have a good $2-$3 Trillion in new debt to go along with, and be a bigger target of Islamic extremism than we already are.

Basically, the commitment that Bush 43 put us into in Iraq had only two possible conclusions. A long term multi-generational occupation of Iraq (probably similar to South Korea model but not exactly) *or* what Obama did, which was runaway.

Putin must be getting one hell of a laugh at our expense (in every sense of that word.)
 
OrphanSlug said:
I agree, another disaster that turned into yet another disaster. That sums up our greater Middle East foreign policy to date.
Click to expand...

I still think that the USA, complicit with its' allies, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey, allowed the rise of ISIS/ISIL in Iraq and Syria to be used as tools to destroy Assad, and perhaps even against a too independent Iraq. The Mass Media in the USA provides a cover story to make us sound like the good guys, but if you are allied with the Bad Guys, you are by definition, one of the Bad Guys. Isn't that disgusting? I think Iraq has an independent Mass Media and sees a more accurate depiction of current events. The USA is just giving a helping hand policing the neighborhood is the cover story and it is BULLCRAP. It is alwaya "follow the money" and the big money is in OIL and GAS.
 
OrphanSlug said:
The ironic part is, if Bush 43 was succeeded by another like-minded Republican... there would already be boots on the ground in Iraq (probably never left in the first place) and we would be pushing ISIS to the border of Syria. The problem is we would have even more military loss of life, our resources would be further strained, have a good $2-$3 Trillion in new debt to go along with, and be a bigger target of Islamic extremism than we already are.

Basically, the commitment that Bush 43 put us into in Iraq had only two possible conclusions. A long term multi-generational occupation of Iraq (probably similar to South Korea model but not exactly) *or* what Obama did, which was runaway.

Putin must be getting one hell of a laugh at our expense (in every sense of that word.)
Click to expand...

Obama may have run away, but where to. Egypt, Libya, Syria. Two presidencies have ruined the ME, Afghanistan is still hemorrhaging refugees and the Islamic State is operational there as well.
 
DaveFagan said:
I still think that the USA, complicit with its' allies, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey, allowed the rise of ISIS/ISIL in Iraq and Syria to be used as tools to destroy Assad, and perhaps even against a too independent Iraq. The Mass Media in the USA provides a cover story to make us sound like the good guys, but if you are allied with the Bad Guys, you are by definition, one of the Bad Guys. Isn't that disgusting? I think Iraq has an independent Mass Media and sees a more accurate depiction of current events. The USA is just giving a helping hand policing the neighborhood is the cover story and it is BULLCRAP. It is alwaya "follow the money" and the big money is in OIL and GAS.
Click to expand...

If follows, it would be an extraordinary planning mistake to allow ISIS to become what it has. Basically it is now out of control, too much of the region is in chaos.

What disgusts me most is our hypocrisy, with just the foreign policy we can verify is fairly accurate. You follow the money in this case though and it terminates with a collision between dictatorship money from power and international oil interests in trade, often the exact same thing but does not always have to be.
 
OrphanSlug said:
If follows, it would be an extraordinary planning mistake to allow ISIS to become what it has. Basically it is now out of control, too much of the region is in chaos.

What disgusts me most is our hypocrisy, with just the foreign policy we can verify is fairly accurate. You follow the money in this case though and it terminates with a collision between dictatorship money from power and international oil interests in trade, often the exact same thing but does not always have to be.
Click to expand...

Observe what we encouraged and allowed to happen in Libya and then try to find a moral/ethical imperative to our motives. We're the Bad Guys. The exact same scenario was in play for Syria until Russia said, "screw you all, we'll help Assad." The USA didn't attack ISIS/ISIL's OIL/MONEY supply lines until Russia embarrassed us into it. I'll put my own puzzle pieces toghether and share the pieces. The puzzle will always create the same picture.
 
DaveFagan said:
Observe what we encouraged and allowed to happen in Libya and then try to find a moral/ethical imperative to our motives. We're the Bad Guys. The exact same scenario was in play for Syria until Russia said, "screw you all, we'll help Assad." The USA didn't attack ISIS/ISIL's OIL/MONEY supply lines until Russia embarrassed us into it. I'll put my own puzzle pieces toghether and share the pieces. The puzzle will always create the same picture.
Click to expand...

Fair point, we cannot rule out behind the scenes motivations.
 
OrphanSlug said:
If this is completely accurate, it will end the debate on how well Putin has outplayed Obama on the international stage.
Click to expand...

If Putin sends Russian troops into Iraq, Obama will have proven he can run circles around him. It will also mean the end of Putin's dictatorship.
 
Let's see.. 1) $trillions more of American money and thousands more American deaths in a country that hates our guts? 2) Or let the Russians spend their money and blood in a country that hates their guts too? Anyone who thinks Muslims are going to cozy up to the Russians are fooling themselves.

Anyway I'll take Door #2 every time.
 
OrphanSlug said:
If this is completely accurate, it will end the debate on how well Putin has outplayed Obama on the international stage.
Click to expand...

Is there any debate? I didn't think there was.
 
Finally Iraq realizes the State Department does not really want to destroy ISIS but covertly support ISIS while destroying the infrastructure of Syria in token air strikes so those images can be used for propaganda purposes.
 
DA60 said:
'Now, in the latest example of just how tenuous Washington’s grip on the region has become, the Iraqi parliament's Security and Defense Committee is calling for the review and cancellation of Baghdad’s security agreement with the US.

“The government and parliament need to review the agreement signed with the United States on security because the United States does not seriously care about its fulfillment,” committee member Hamid al-Mutlaq, a senior Sunni lawmaker told Sputnik on Wednesday. “We demand that it be annulled,” he added.

Who will fill the void you ask? You guessed it:

Putin_0_0.png


"Soon, a meeting [of the committee] with Prime Minister Haider Abadi will be held, at which we will propose cooperating with Russia in carrying out airstrikes against IS and in the fight against terrorism in Iraq," another committee member said earlier this week.'

Iraq Seeks To Cancel Security Agreement With US, Will Invite Russia To Fight ISIS | Zero Hedge


I cannot find a 'well known, respected' source for this...but it IS interesting and I have heard rumblings of this before.


Thoughts?
Click to expand...

Lead from behind + withdraw troops before the region is ready + leave allies high and dry + creating vacuum =
loss of influence in the region + creating vacuums others will fill

Totally predictable, Except when blinded by partisan and ideological blinders, such as Obama apparently is.
 
DaveFagan said:
I still think that the USA, complicit with its' allies, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey, allowed the rise of ISIS/ISIL in Iraq and Syria to be used as tools to destroy Assad, and perhaps even against a too independent Iraq. The Mass Media in the USA provides a cover story to make us sound like the good guys, but if you are allied with the Bad Guys, you are by definition, one of the Bad Guys. Isn't that disgusting? I think Iraq has an independent Mass Media and sees a more accurate depiction of current events. The USA is just giving a helping hand policing the neighborhood is the cover story and it is BULLCRAP. It is alwaya "follow the money" and the big money is in OIL and GAS.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the media's spin on this is not doing us any favors in the long run. When people saw the bodybags and dead soldiers from Vietnam it reminded them of the seriousness of war. In this day and age we treat war as all "sunshine and lollipops". Diplomatically we started losing clout when we were ok with Nouri Al-Malaki's corrupt supreme court overturning the Constitution we helped the Iraqi's write. We built a legit coalition inside of Iraq and the parties were willing to come together under the initial Constitution of Iraq. Once that Constitution got discarded there was no reason for people to work together and it was a slow breakdown since then.
 
iguanaman said:
If Putin sends Russian troops into Iraq, Obama will have proven he can run circles around him. It will also mean the end of Putin's dictatorship.
Click to expand...

Doubtful, Putin has already dodged bigger landmines than Iraq or Syria.
 
SenorXm/Sirius said:
Let's see.. 1) $trillions more of American money and thousands more American deaths in a country that hates our guts? 2) Or let the Russians spend their money and blood in a country that hates their guts too? Anyone who thinks Muslims are going to cozy up to the Russians are fooling themselves.

Anyway I'll take Door #2 every time.
Click to expand...
But it's not about "Muslims" cozying up to the Russians. It's about ASSAD cozying up to the Russians. We were trying to install "moderate rebels" (lol) to fight Assad and ISIS. So we were trying to create a minor fighting force that would immediately be surrounded in a two front war. That was our dumbass strategy. Not to mention those "moderate rebels" turned out to be sympathetic to ISIS and Al-Qaeda anyway. It was a mind-bogglingly stupid strategy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom