Iraqi uprising against US military presence is increasing. Are geopolitical interests justification good enough for waging war against Iraqi nation on Iraqi soil ?

[Papillon + 485]

The infamous red arrow sir. This appears to translate as ''I did not like reading that, as it contained facts to which I have no argument.''

I fear the average age of users here is barely in double figures sometimes, hence the need to call users ''needledick'' as if on a school playground. 

You can rest assured though that the red arrow is almost a compliment, as it seems to be the American way of saying ''I have no argument for your statement.''

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

54 minutes ago, remake it said:

It appears that you and President Trump are equally inept in assessing the Iraqi situation and the impact of the drone strike as while Trump might win a game of checkers against a small child he has no capacity to think the necessary number of moves ahead to even be competitive in a game of chess.

Dissent and disagree and argue to your heart's content.  TDS can be amusing.

 

Meanwhile, for lurkers to consider:

7 Big Things To Think About Now That We’ve Terminated A Top Iranian General

The decision to kill Qassem Suleimani when we did and in the context we did is jaw-dropping for a few reasons. Suleimani’s significance was massive and taking him out now will have far greater effects than when the United States killed Osama bin Laden.

Killing OBL was righteous, and the decision to send U.S. special operators into Pakistan to conduct the kill operation was President Barack Obama’s greatest and most honorable moment of his presidency, but by that time, bin Laden was mostly an operational has-been.

In contrast, Suleimani was still on the upswing of his terrorism career, and is responsible for the deaths of hundreds of American servicemembers and coalition forces, the maiming of thousands of Americans and coalition forces, and the slaughter of millions of others, including civilians across the region. And he was just getting warmed up. He was not a non-state actor with a terrorist following. He was a state-funded and supported official with the resources, political clout, and international legitimacy proffered by states unwilling to join the U.S. in isolating the regime.

As explained by Mike Doran in today’s New York Times, Suleimani built Lebanese Hezbollah and ensured it was armed to the teeth. He extended the imperialistic reach of the Iran regime through organizing, training, and arming militias all over the Middle East. Most proximate to the events yesterday, the Department of Defense blamed Suleimani for ordering the militia mob’s aggression against the U.S. embassy the day before.

The Airstrike Against Suleimani Was Warranted

Suleimani used U.S. airstrikes against Kata’ib Hezbollah, an Iranian-backed militia that operates in Iraq and killed dozens, as the pretext for mobbing and threatening the American embassy in Baghdad. Although the images of the Iranian-supported militias mobbing the U.S. embassy were harrowing, the embassy and those inside were well defended and prepared. Army Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters, “We are very confident that the integrity of that embassy is strong, and it is highly unlikely to be physically overrun by anyone. … There is sufficient combat power there, air and ground, that anyone who attempts to overrun that will run into a buzzsaw.”

The U.S. airstrikes which killed dozens of Iranian-backed militia was in direct response to a militia attack that killed an American contractor. President Donald Trump, while steering clear of the words “red line,” has repeatedly warned Iran against doing anything that would harm an American. He made that point in response to Iran’s downing of the Global Hawk.  ...

 

     (Much more in the link)

 

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

3 minutes ago, Papillon said:

The infamous red arrow sir. This appears to translate as ''I did not like reading that, as it contained facts to which I have no argument.''

I fear the average age of users here is barely in double figures sometimes, hence the need to call users ''needledick'' as if on a school playground. 

You can rest assured though that the red arrow is almost a compliment, as it seems to be the American way of saying ''I have no argument for your statement.''

Yep, I generally feel red downvotes should be reserved for comments that are way out of line, and not simply for "I disagree".

 

[Papillon + 485]

Just now, Tom Kirkman said:

Yep, I generally feel red downvotes should be reserved for comments that are way out of line, and not simply for "I disagree".

 

Precisely sir, such as the buffoon's disgusting comment about Miss Thunberg for example.

[remake it + 288]

35 minutes ago, Papillon said:

The infamous red arrow sir. This appears to translate as ''I did not like reading that, as it contained facts to which I have no argument.''

Dear site administrators/moderators in the light of this wise finding and being ever the contrarian can you please change the member's reputation count mechanism for @remake it so that it captures these most rewarding red arrows and reflects it under the avatar thus

• Members
• + 42
• 666 posts

[Marcin + 519]

On 1/1/2020 at 7:44 AM, Douglas Buckland said:

In my humble opinion, the US should leave southern Iraq to it’s own devices and move their entire mission, military and diplomatic to Kurdistan. The Kurds generally like Americans and appreciate what they can do to assist the Kurds militarily and economically. This is my opinion after roughly two years spent based in either Erbil or Taq Taq.

The Southern Iraqis have shown neither the will or the effort to rebuild after Saddam, and as usual blame the situation on the US. Leave it to them. If they want to jump into bed with the Iranians, Russians or Chinese, let them and we’ll all sit back and watch how that turns out.

Douglas, Southern Iraq is the most important, most of oil deposits.

There is your heart where your oil is, is this famous Latin sentence.

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

Thank goodness CNN is reporting the important stuff.  But I really wanna know if Trump had 2 scoops of ice cream or just 1 scoop.

https://twitter.com/CNNPolitics/status/1213170673994084353

[Marcin + 519]

1 hour ago, Tom Kirkman said:

The decision to kill Qassem Suleimani when we did and in the context we did is jaw-dropping for a few reasons. Suleimani’s significance was massive and taking him out now will have far greater effects than when the United States killed Osama bin Laden.

Killing OBL was righteous, and the decision to send U.S. special operators into Pakistan to conduct the kill operation was President Barack Obama’s greatest and most honorable moment of his presidency, but by that time, bin Laden was mostly an operational has-been.

In contrast, Suleimani was still on the upswing of his terrorism career, and is responsible for the deaths of hundreds of American servicemembers and coalition forces, the maiming of thousands of Americans and coalition forces, and the slaughter of millions of others, including civilians across the region. And he was just getting warmed up. He was not a non-state actor with a terrorist following. He was a state-funded and supported official with the resources, political clout, and international legitimacy proffered by states unwilling to join the U.S. in isolating the regime.

Tom, each and every analyst will tell you that killing Suleimani and Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis was a huge political mistake made by Donald Trump.

Consider a few observations and opinions:

- Only upside is that personal power and contacts of 2 generals vanished. But Quds is a large formation, replacement was already appointed. The same with PMF, the replacement would be announced fast. Military machinery will work as previously, now only with better morale to fight common enemy and conduct vengeance for the death of martyrs,

- Killing of Suleimani strengthened Iranian authorities and significantly weakened any dissenters,

- Iranian nation is now more united against foreign power,

- Iraqi nation is now more united against foreign power,

- United States used terrorist methods in non-war situation for the first time since Cold War ended (for Americans it does not matter, you are all exceptional, but allies need to think about Plan B),

- I think European Union should think about common armed forces including nuclear weapons, cause we do not know if tomorrow US will not kill important Russian general in Warsaw or Berlin and draw us into catastrophic war.

- US became too irresponsible warmonger, and remember its civilians are safe 5,000 miles from here, all other people are just collateral damage,

- Such escalation will bring a lot of casualties. It is a typical, arrogant act of war. Probably less than 1,000 US casualties and more than 50,000 of Iraqi and Iranian casualties, but for Trump it would be 1,000 too many.

- Trump probably lost re-election, he was elected on anti-war agenda and MAGA, and this act is pure warmongering without much sense, because no US foreign policy goal was achieved.

- At the end of the day who cares, US has capacity to kill ALL 80 million of Iranians and ALL 40 million of Iraqi so US wins in any scenario.

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

3 minutes ago, Marcin said:

Tom, each and every analyst will tell you that killing Suleimani and Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis was a huge political mistake made by Donald Trump.

Marcin, the U.S. rolling over and playing dead and trying to placate Iran (e.g. giving Iran cash) like Obama did, clearly did not work. 

[SERWIN + 749]

36 minutes ago, Tom Kirkman said:

Thank goodness CNN is reporting the important stuff.  But I really wanna know if Trump had 2 scoops of ice cream or just 1 scoop.

https://twitter.com/CNNPolitics/status/1213170673994084353

OMG noooooooo!!! Don't tell me... don't tell me... was it twoooo scoooooooops? The apocalypse is upon us now!!!

[Guest]

41 minutes ago, Tom Kirkman said:

But I really wanna know if Trump had 2 scoops of ice cream or just 1 scoop.

 

It's possibly 2 with sprinkles and so it will kick off and be front page news tomorrow for you guys as there is nothing much going on globally. 

[SERWIN + 749]

Just now, DayTrader said:

It's possibly 2 with sprinkles and so it will kick off and be front page news tomorrow for you guys as there is nothing much going on globally. 

Sprinkles? Sprinkles? Really? The Demons will have him now, let the impeachment begin in earnest. We will spend another 30 something million to get him impeached for this crime against humanity!! And afterwards we will punish him by sprinkling him to death with....sprinkles!!!

[Guest]

They may go with the double whammy with the outrage of the salt cellar size too

[remake it + 288]

On 12/31/2019 at 11:06 AM, Marcin said:

FACT1: In March this year Iraqi parliament, democratically elected parliament, voted for US military to leave Iraqi territory.

QUESTION1: Should US indefinitely occupy Iraq, against will of Iraqi nation ?

 

By decree of the red arrow your status has been elevated from a thread starting "huckleberry" to a Nostradamus (with apologies of course to the formerly avatared Green Arrow now unmasked as his true self in as a comedic ukulele player).

 

[Bob D + 562]

The fact that the US strike took place in Baghdad, not Iran, is important diplomatically because it validates, yet again, the American charge about Iranian state-sponsored meddling/terrorism that is the basis for the sanctions. The fact the primary target was General Soleimani—one of the most senior commanders in the Revolutionary Guards and a household name in Iran—is important militarily because this escalation puts significant pressure on Tehran to respond in order to save face with an already restive populace facing severe economic conditions.  Clearly the Pentagon knew exactly where Soleimani was.  Last night, before the killing of Soleimani, Secretary of Defense Esper said, "The game has changed." That is about as clear a signal as can be that the US will not stand down as occurred in June 2019, when Trump called off the limited air strike that was going to be the US response to Iran's downing of a US unmanned drone. It seems the US has changed strategy and wants to hit Iran hard.  

 

 

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

37 minutes ago, DayTrader said:

It's possibly 2 with sprinkles and so it will kick off and be front page news tomorrow for you guys as there is nothing much going on globally. 

 

33 minutes ago, SERWIN said:

Sprinkles? Sprinkles? Really? The Demons will have him now, let the impeachment begin in earnest. We will spend another 30 something million to get him impeached for this crime against humanity!! And afterwards we will punish him by sprinkling him to death with....sprinkles!!!

 

[Marcin + 519]

1 hour ago, Tom Kirkman said:

Marcin, the U.S. rolling over and playing dead and trying to placate Iran (e.g. giving Iran cash) like Obama did, clearly did not work. 

Tom, an interesting observation, which I had not seen anywhere in the news.

When Suleimani was killed, there were his pictures in military uniform all over the media.

I asked myself 1 question, Why so much media attention about just major general, 2 star general ?

It is a senior rank but every army in the world has one of them: 2 star generals every 10,000 soldiers more or less.

United States has about 150-200 2 star generals as far as I remember.

But not in Iran.

Major general is a highest rank you can technically have in Iranian Military Forces (of any branch).

4 star ranks were not awarded since Iranian Revolution, and 3 star ranks not used since Iran-Iraq war.

This information should be in the news, cause not many people are aware of this pecularity of Iranian Armed Forces

Edited January 3, 2020 by Marcin
typo

[Papillon + 485]

2 hours ago, remake it said:

it captures these most rewarding red arrows and reflects it under the avatar thus

3 hours ago, Papillon said:

You can rest assured though that the red arrow is almost a compliment, as it seems to be the American way of saying ''I have no argument for your statement.''

One of the reactions to this post sir was simply a red arrow, which proves my point perfectly. This post too will receive one no doubt. As I say, I will take them as a compliment from the stumped and ignorant all day long, as I enjoy the praise as Mr van Eck does. 

Edited January 3, 2020 by Papillon

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

1 minute ago, Marcin said:

Tom, an interesting observation, which I had not seen anywhere in the news.

When Suleimani was killed, there were his pictures in military uniform all over the media.

< snip >

Interesting, I was unaware of the Iranian Major General ranking being the top.  Although I had heard that Suleimani was considered to be ranked number 2 in Iran, just after the Ayatollah.

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

2 hours ago, Marcin said:

Douglas, Southern Iraq is the most important, most of oil deposits.

There is your heart where your oil is, is this famous Latin sentence.

So what? At the moment the US doesn’t need either the oil or the political headache of Southern Iraq.

The Iraqis in the south have never even attempted to rebuild their portion of Iraq by themselves, have continually blamed everyone else for their situation and have flirted with any outside influence which promises them money (selling out their own country).

Compare this to what Kurdistan has accomplished in the past 20 years, even with the ISIS incursion.

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

7 minutes ago, Papillon said:

One of the reactions to this post sir was simply a red arrow, which proves my point perfectly. This post too will receive one no doubt. As I say, I will take them as a compliment from the stumped and ignorant all day long, as I enjoy the praise as Mr van Eck does. 

I wouldn't worry too much about red arrows.  When I receive a red arrow it normally just makes me laugh.

 

/ edit   heh heh, you made me laugh, Papillon 😁

Edited January 3, 2020 by Tom Kirkman

[Papillon + 485]

Not at all sir, as I suggested I believe there is an element of compliment to it and humour as you say. Therefore you will receive one for talking sense, this appears to be their new function, and the racist comments and similar will soon receive the purple trophy no doubt.

6 minutes ago, Tom Kirkman said:

heh heh, you made me laugh, Papillon

Happy to oblige, and a happy new year to you.

Edited January 3, 2020 by Papillon

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

People arguing here and elsewhere are uninformed and ignorant about one critical point. An attack on a country's embassy is an attack on that country's sovereign soil and thus, an act of war. Iran got away with it, once because of a no balls President in office and the ridiculously thin veneer that it was "students" doing the attack and not condoned by the government. Both statements were of course, thoroughly false. They weren't students and the govt most certainly condoned the act. 

Soleimani has been playing American presidents since Carter. He finally met his match. Marcin and his two sock puppets are wrong about how easily replaced he'll be. Iranians are notorious for compartmentalizing information. What was between his ears, and is now smeared on the wall at Baghdad airport is also not so easily replaced. And oh by the way, his next replacement is now going to worry where his brains are going to get splattered. 

[Papillon + 485]

I have received another. Wonderful. From the user who called another 'needledick' with his famous charm and wisdom if my memory serves.

I am grateful beyond words, feel free to grace every post of mine with the famous red arrow sir, as it is comforting to know the playground is slowly becoming vacant.

[Daniel Ryslink + 19]

Tom Kirkman - on the contrary. Everything was working quite well, there was a multilateral contract between the EU, USA and Iran, Iran was fulfilling its end of it. 

Then the disaster in the form of Trump election happened, Trump came and stabbed his European allies in the back (because why would you respect some treaties or international law if you have the strongest army in the world, right?), and started with what could be only named as bullying Iran. The Iran of course refuses to negotiate with him now - why would you negotiate with someone whose word may not last more than a single day?

So instead of focusing on domestic problems, like the bizarre opiate abuse epidemic ongoing in the USA, Trump wastes resources in escalating conflicts that will ultimately spin out of control.