• 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!

Tribal leader: Iraqi troops in Anbar province could 'collapse within hours'

annata said:
oh I agree , how are you? Haven't spoken to you in awhile. I'm not too familiar with the Assad's pre-Obama;they were always just kina "there"
Click to expand...

Been good buddy, thanks. I'll be checking out your link that you gave to another poster, I would like to have a place to easily follow Libyan developments!
 
annata said:
oh I agree , how are you? Haven't spoken to you in awhile. I'm not too familiar with the Assad's pre-Obama;they were always just kina "there"
Click to expand...

Official Washington’s ever-influential neoconservatives and their “liberal interventionist” allies see President Barack Obama’s decision to extend U.S. airstrikes against Islamic State terrorists into Syria as a new chance to achieve the long-treasured neocon goal of “regime change” in Damascus.

On the surface, Obama’s extraordinary plan to ignore Syrian sovereignty and attack across the border has been viewed as a unilateral U.S. action to strike at the terrorist Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), but it could easily evolve into a renewed effort to overthrow Bashar al-Assad’s government, ironically one of ISIS’s principal goals.


President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden meet with members of the National Security Council in the Situation Room of the White House, Sept. 10, 2014. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)
ISIS began as part of the Sunni resistance to George W. Bush’s invasion of Iraq which had elevated Iraq’s Shiite majority to power. Then known as “al-Qaeda in Iraq,” the terrorist group stoked a sectarian war by slaughtering Shiites and bombing their mosques.

https://consortiumnews.com/2014/09/11/neocons-revive-syria-regime-change-plan/
 
Montecresto said:
Been good buddy, thanks. I'll be checking out your link that you gave to another poster, I would like to have a place to easily follow Libyan developments!
Click to expand...
glad to here it. I try to keep it upto date,at least the major events as the country is in spams one way or the other ever y day.
Glad you mentioned it - I am done working for the day, and will look for the latest and post it there.
Libyan civil war?
 
Hamster Buddha said:
Tribal leader: Iraqi troops in Anbar province could 'collapse within hours'

View attachment 67180492

Exert: An Iraqi tribal leader said Saturday that ISIS militants are gaining ground in Anbar province, predicting a "collapse within hours" of Iraqi army forces there if tribal forces withdraw.

So about all that progress that's been made defeating ISIS that the WH was championing a short while ago...
Click to expand...

We need to go there and kill them. Why? Because **** evil.

Its a pitty the left doesn't have the balls to do what it takes, they never do.
 
US Conservative said:
We need to go there and kill them. Why? Because **** evil.

Its a pitty the left doesn't have the balls to do what it takes, they never do.
Click to expand...

Kurds are accepting volunteers- mind you, bring about 5 k for weapons, kit and such.
 
US Conservative said:
We need to go there and kill them. Why? Because **** evil.

Its a pitty the left doesn't have the balls to do what it takes, they never do.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately the left supported the overthrow of Mubarak, Gaddafi and attempts at Assad, all of which you support I'm sure. The left defeated Germany and Japan, the left went into Vietnam, the left supported the Mujahideen in A-Stan which inevitably threw of the Russians. The left beat back "the bad guys" in Kosovo. There's no shortage of warmongering on the left.
 
Montecresto said:
Unfortunately the left supported the overthrow of Mubarak, Gaddafi and attempts at Assad, all of which you support I'm sure. The left defeated Germany and Japan, the left went into Vietnam, the left supported the Mujahideen in A-Stan which inevitably threw of the Russians. The left beat back "the bad guys" in Kosovo. There's no shortage of warmongering on the left.
Click to expand...

Gaddafi was an ally in the war on terror-he should have stayed but Hillary lied to get the US involved there in his ousting.
The left was fine with hitler until they attacked Uncle Joe. And what you call the left (FDR, Truman) have very little in common with the America-hating left of today.

Crack open a history book one of these days.
 
Montecresto said:
Great, it's about time somebody else take up the charge.
Click to expand...

As much as I respect the commonwealth nations etc, they dont have the resources to sustain such efforts, neither does jordan.

Its going to fall to us, and the question really is when, not if.

I happen to think the "when" is after this chump of a President is out.
 
US Conservative said:
As much as I respect the commonwealth nations etc, they dont have the resources to sustain such efforts, neither does jordan.

Its going to fall to us, and the question really is when, not if.

I happen to think the "when" is after this chump of a President is out.
Click to expand...

Grab your boots and gun.
 
Montecresto said:
Indubitably, the gulf states are pumping support to the extremists operating in Syria. Who knows if we'll ever know for sure how much effort the US has put into helping Syrian opposition overthrow president Assad? Our CIA has used training camps in Jordan and Turkey to train opposition forces, weapons systems confiscated from Gaddafi's army were smuggled to opposition forces from the Benghazi annex thru Turkey, the Obama administration repeatedly sought a UN resolution for the use of force in Syria, etc.
Click to expand...
I've seen no evidence of any game-changing aid to the opposition from the United States. When we aided the mujahideen in Afghanistan, we provided them with surface-to-air missiles, which nullified the threat of Soviet air power and in large part prevented the Soviet Army from winning. I admit that I'm ignorant on the specifics of US assistance to the rebels, but we haven't provided them with anything other than small arms and a few antitank missiles, and certainly not anything that would reduce Assad's barrel bombing of opposition-held areas. I've seen a pro-revolution site state that US aid to the rebels has consisted mainly of directing the flow of Saudi and Qatari aid away from the hardcore Islamist rebels and towards more moderate factions.
Had the aid and assistance gone to president Assad instead, we wouldn't be worrying about Syria right now.
Click to expand...

We weren't worrying about Syria before 2011, and look where we are now. If Assad wins due to American help, we'll be in a worse position than we were before the Arab Spring because Syrian Sunnis will hate us for our support for the regime.
 
apdst said:
But wait, you claimed earlier in this thread that ISIS troopers aren't real Muslims. Now they are?
Click to expand...

I think you have me mistaken for someone else. Please quote where I made such a statement.
 
MadLib said:
I've seen no evidence of any game-changing aid to the opposition from the United States. When we aided the mujahideen in Afghanistan, we provided them with surface-to-air missiles, which nullified the threat of Soviet air power and in large part prevented the Soviet Army from winning. I admit that I'm ignorant on the specifics of US assistance to the rebels, but we haven't provided them with anything other than small arms and a few antitank missiles, and certainly not anything that would reduce Assad's barrel bombing of opposition-held areas. I've seen a pro-revolution site state that US aid to the rebels has consisted mainly of directing the flow of Saudi and Qatari aid away from the hardcore Islamist rebels and towards more moderate factions.


We weren't worrying about Syria before 2011, and look where we are now. If Assad wins due to American help, we'll be in a worse position than we were before the Arab Spring because Syrian Sunnis will hate us for our support for the regime.
Click to expand...

This is true-we gave a game-changing assistance to the muj in afghanistan.
Im not seeing that now.
 
MadLib said:
I've seen no evidence of any game-changing aid to the opposition from the United States. When we aided the mujahideen in Afghanistan, we provided them with surface-to-air missiles, which nullified the threat of Soviet air power and in large part prevented the Soviet Army from winning. I admit that I'm ignorant on the specifics of US assistance to the rebels, but we haven't provided them with anything other than small arms and a few antitank missiles, and certainly not anything that would reduce Assad's barrel bombing of opposition-held areas. I've seen a pro-revolution site state that US aid to the rebels has consisted mainly of directing the flow of Saudi and Qatari aid away from the hardcore Islamist rebels and towards more moderate factions.


We weren't worrying about Syria before 2011, and look where we are now. If Assad wins due to American help, we'll be in a worse position than we were before the Arab Spring because Syrian Sunnis will hate us for our support for the regime.
Click to expand...

First of all, there has been plenty of US support for the Syrian opposition, not as much as the right would like to see, and not as much as Obama would like to have (and attempted) provided overtly, but its been there all along, to the consternation of Russia and China. Otherwise, are you denying that Syrian regime change has been a long term USFP ambition, or do I misunderstand you?
 
Montecresto said:
First of all, there has been plenty of US support for the Syrian opposition, not as much as the right would like to see, and not as much as Obama would like to have (and attempted) provided overtly, but its been there all along, to the consternation of Russia and China.
Click to expand...
I'm not denying that. I'm just saying that a few weeks of training and some Kalashnikovs aren't going to help against a modern state military that has tanks, aircraft and heavy artillery.
Otherwise, are you denying that Syrian regime change has been a long term USFP ambition, or do I misunderstand you?
Click to expand...

I know some plan drafted under the Bush administration included Syria among a list of regime change candidates, but we've been pretty neutral about Assad pre-civil war, with Hillary Clinton referring to him as a "moderating influence." I don't think anyone in 2010 thought that Syria would be the birthplace of an extremist caliphate, but repression by a minority dictatorship is definitely a contributing factor to the rise of ISIS.
 
US Conservative said:
Why are they even there? Try hard here.

On a separate note, thank you for your service. I dont agree with you (apparently) but I highly respect that.
Click to expand...

As I mentioned earlier, provide limited assistance. They must learn to address these issue themselves, including what causes so many Sunni to rebel in Iraq. And that one I have answered in a number of posts.
 
Montecresto said:
First of all, there has been plenty of US support for the Syrian opposition, not as much as the right would like to see, and not as much as Obama would like to have (and attempted) provided overtly, but its been there all along, to the consternation of Russia and China. Otherwise, are you denying that Syrian regime change has been a long term USFP ambition, or do I misunderstand you?
Click to expand...

Syria is a pawn in the undeclared war between Iran and Saudi. Ya can throw Turkey in as they also want regime change.
 
JANFU said:
As I mentioned earlier, provide limited assistance. They must learn to address these issue themselves, including what causes so many Sunni to rebel in Iraq. And that one I have answered in a number of posts.
Click to expand...

Of course they must learn to address the issue themselves but they aren't there yet. Thats why Canada is there.

Canada is at war with ISIS.
 
US Conservative said:
Of course they must learn to address the issue themselves but they aren't there yet. Thats why Canada is there.

Canada is at war with ISIS.
Click to expand...

Indeed we are, and I support a limited mission. I would rather provide more support to the Kurds and let them run for their independence.
 
MadLib said:
I'm not denying that. I'm just saying that a few weeks of training and some Kalashnikovs aren't going to help against a modern state military that has tanks, aircraft and heavy artillery.


I know some plan drafted under the Bush administration included Syria among a list of regime change candidates, but we've been pretty neutral about Assad pre-civil war, with Hillary Clinton referring to him as a "moderating influence." I don't think anyone in 2010 thought that Syria would be the birthplace of an extremist caliphate, but repression by a minority dictatorship is definitely a contributing factor to the rise of ISIS.
Click to expand...

I think that you minimise the help that the US has provided the Syrian opposition. And don't forget, president Assad is fighting his own war on terror, he's not fighting a conventional army out on the battlefield. He has every difficulty that the US has with civilian "collateral damage". The opposition can sucker punch him all they want, whereas he's quite aware that Western media will be reporting every civilian that falls prey to his errant bombs. As for regime change, that ambition and looking for a good reason to press it) predates even George Bush.

Repeated NIE's document that US intervention is having the opposite (spoken) desired effect. And has actually increased terrorists and terrorism in the region, and unlike the average partisan, I'm not hesitant to point out that both parties are contributing factors. And you're right, before Hillary Clinton was against president Assad, she was for him.
 
JANFU said:
Syria is a pawn in the undeclared war between Iran and Saudi. Ya can throw Turkey in as they also want regime change.
Click to expand...

And I think Saudi Arabia as well. But without US approval, there is no regime change in the Middle East. Were you denying the US's long standing desire for regime change in Syria?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom