Iranian-backed militias overtake al-Qaeda as greatest security threat in Iraq

Al-Qaeda has friends in high places, but they are ultimately on their own, with nothing like the full support of a sovereign but openly brutal and genocidal state next door. Even in Pakistan's double game, al-Qaeda is but one group being played against others, and would never enjoy quite the same pedigree of, for example, Lashkar-e-Taiba.

By contrast, as direct clients of the Quds force, the Shi'ite militias are hand-picked agents of Iran's proxy jihad in Iraq. "Iran-backed Militant Groups Are Biggest Security Threat in Iraq: US General," from the Associated Press, August 16

http://www.aina.org/news/20110816183607.htm

 

Obama has been defeated by the Iranians. Obama has been defeated by every foreign power he engages. Obama can't even defeat Gadhafi. Any questions?

 

Khadafi is on his way out.. Looking for A HIDEY HOLE... Check today's news.

 

Not really since Obama is rather stupid and believes he can appease the Islamic world by behaving like a Dhimmi.

 

If we leave Iraq with Iran in control, it will be more a matter of cutting costs than of defeat.

We could easily defeat Iran. We could literally wipe them off of the map if we wanted to.

The problem is that we've already spent so much on Iraq and Afghanistan that there's no sense in escalating things toward Iran. The Ayatollah is smart enough to know what position we're in financially, so he realizes that he can fund an insurgency in Iraq without us being able to do much in retaliation.

In many respects, this is kind of like payback for the Iran-Iraq War.

 

*raises hand*

Yes. How is this Obama's fault when Iran's influence in Iraq began under Bush?

 

The big question I have is how the Iran linked militias are viewed by Iraq. Both in the sense of the government and civilians who are not part of a militia.

If they don't think the militias are linked to Iran, than we have a communication/evidence issue.

If they do think the militias are linked to Iran, and they don't like that, then this might be fine. Iraqis can fight them, and if it escelates into a rematch between Iran and Iraq, well, that might not be a bad thing in the long run depending on how it goes down.

At least if a war starts soon the US has troops, bases, and supply chains already flanking Iran.

 

Granny says, "Well if dat ain't a kick inna teeth..

Iraq-Iran Ties Grow Stronger
14 July`12 WASHINGTON -- In the run-up to the war in Iraq, neoconservative hawks in and out of the Bush administration promised that the U.S. invasion would quickly transform that country into a strong ally, a model Arab democracy and a major oil producer that would lower world prices, even while paying for its own reconstruction.

 

The US has been lying about Iraq for well over 20 years. They cannot be believed on anything concerning Iraq.

It was the US that decided to make Iraq its responsibility. As a result of the US wars against Iraq, millions have been maimed, poisoned, killed, tortured, been made homeless and lost their livelyhoods.

You cannot believe people who say they love you when they bomb your cities, and everything that supports the civilian population, destroy the value of your money, break into your houses and steal your stuff, and kidnap and kill your relatives and leave you defenseless against US sponsored criminals.

US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfield encouraging President Hussein to kill more for US interests

 

Not suprising at all. We knew this was going to happen but are helpless to do anything about it because even people in our own country are constantly sabotaging the effort in Iraq. The rest of the world is happy to let the US do all the work, and take all the blame either way. If the US fails in Iraq, it is not because we did not try to make a difference at least. It is the failure of an alliance, and the failure of the rest of the world to care about the fate of an entire region and race of humans. The rest of the world needs to step up to the plate and take a swing sort to speak.

 

Ah yes, the rhetorical argument. The argument based on emotion. Very good sir, you are a puppet of the very people who want to kill you.

 

The only failure of "the rest of the world" was to believe the liars in DC and support their vicious aggression against Iraq for over 20 years.

 

Liars... Lied about what, WMD's. Your going to base your opinion simply on this? So you believe Saddam should have been left alone? I can tell you now, if your going to base your debate on the WMD argument alone, you will fail miserably debating with me.

 

Presumably Courtney is referring to Al Qaida. The same Al Qaida/Muslim Brotherhood that the US subsidize and supports against the Christians of Lybia, Yugoslavia, Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria.

 

We may have supported such people at some point, but not against the people they ruled. We supported them in the context of the cold war, russian influence and impending world destruction if the U.S. or the U.S.S.R were to deploy the ultimate weapon against each other. That by far, was a greater threat then what we are dealing with today. As a result, we did knowingly support dangerous people in the shadow of a much more dangerous threat which may have occurred if we had not done so otherwise.

 

Glad to see that you recognize that the wars against Iraq were based on lies.

Maybe you can respect America's Mandate of Peace spelled out in our Declaration of Independence that tells us “to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them,”and to have “a decent respect to the opinions of mankind”.-

The US installed Sadam Hussein and armed him and gave him permission to invade Kuwaite. So, the US is responsible for everything Sadam did. Furthermore, President Sadam Hussein offered America all the oil it wants at the cost of production, military bases and a peaceful secure change of regime.

But the war crazies wanted war. They could hardly wait to start collecting the trillions of dollars they were going to loot from the people of Iraq and America.
What did they care about honor, peace and cheap oil for Americans? Nothing.

 

So, what's this great threat that drives honorable people to support cutthroat murdering terrorists against innocent people as most recently in Lybia and Syria?

Is America so wimpy, unprincipled and gutless that we have to do that?

 

I would not argue that we never did support Saddam. But again, you have to take it in context of the time we supported him. We would have never supported such a person if we were not working within the context of the cold war. People have already forgotten, amazingly so. I still remember, even in mid to late 80's as a child, going thru drills strictly to train kids to protect themselves if there were a nuclear attack. As if hiding under your desk was going to protect you from a nuclear blast let alone a building falling on top of you. I still remember that, and unless there was not a real fear, a serious and real threat, we would not have had such drills. Which goes further to explain why we had to support the undesireable in order to prevent an even more undesireable situation from occurring.

 

Yes we are. We are wimpy. I would agree with that wholehartedly. Its evident since WW2 how wimpy we have become. We went to war in Vietnam and capitulated to ourselves. We could not stomach the war long enough to be victorious. Again, during the Korean war, we failed to be victorious because we had capitulated to ourselves. During the gulf war, we capitulated again at the boarder of Iraq. We should have kept going and taken Saddam out right there. But no... Bush 1 knew that a long conflict would not be supported by the general public, which is why the conflict was as short as it was, and ended when it did. In the invasion of Iraq it was easily seen how Americans are as wimpy as they are. It only took a few months and a few thousand casualties and we were already throwing up the white flag. Yes, we are wimpy. We have all the tools to win these wars, and had all the right reasons to fight them.. but failed to stay the course and made excuses and rhetorical outs for us to retreat. All our enemies know this and that is why even the smallest ill equipped militias mock us.

 

That is exactly what they wanted you to feel. Then when Bob Hope lauded the big intercontinental missiles as protecting America, we could all feel safe again.
But it was all a racket. There was no real threat from Russia as the Russian people heroically refused to participate in a nuclear Armageddon against America.

How could there be a threat from Russia when it was the US government that gave them the means to have a nuclear bomb? All during the "Cold War" the US was subsidizing the Soviet Union.

 

It does not really matter what the Russian people wanted, they would be forced to participate either way. If the Russian or US military and those who controlled it decided to press the big red button, the population of Russia would be helpless, how are they going to decide not to participate?

As far as your conspiracy theory, I have no time for it, sorry.

 

[video=youtube;5yyDAfeIx-s]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yyDAfeIx-s&feature=related[/video]
We should be ashamed of ourselves.
[video=youtube;MQ0x5ZLbeqQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQ0x5ZLbeqQ&feature=fvwrel[/video]

 

Sorry Courtney is too much in love with the party line with no time to get out of the box.