Is there another choice? Kicking the US out and hoping to satiate Iran is the least messy path out this for Iraq.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
US Department of Defense confirms it targeted/killed Qasem Soleimani, commander of Iran's Quds Force, outside Baghdad Airport
- Thread starter poklane
- Start date
- Status
Wait so are you saying that its the will of the Iraqi people to have the US occupy Iraq or that the people just don't want to be sanctioned? Because those are two very different stances. If the Iraqi PMs story about Soleimani being there to orchestrate peace talks is true at all then Iraq has every reason in the world to be furious at the US for implicating Iraq in this plot that lead to his death. And they have every right to end the US presence there.
I definitely understand not wanting to have your economy ravaged like the US did Iran but you have to stand up for yourselves at some point or this will just inform western leaders how they can handle your people with kid gloves for generations to come.
Who decide if the government work for or against the benefit of the people?
You?
The US government?
What do you think the message then?
That they didn't support the Taliban enough?
It's a bit of a revisionist history too by the way, the US was arming Jihadists there before the Soviet invasion, Charlie Wilson and the Reagan administration just ramped up that support
Operation Cyclone - Wikipedia
Trump learned nothing from his attempted coup in Venezuela last year, where the same thing more-or-less happened.
This has united the entire country. I don't think the regime could have ever dreamed of a bigger propaganda win.
Imagine thinking siding with Iran is the smart position for the Iraqi people, the same Iran that it's militia have been killing the Iraqi people.
The Iraqi people decide and have decided that the government isn't working for their benefit, that's why they have protesting since October, or do you have an objection on that?
Protesting is part of a democracy and elections is how the people let the government knows it doesn't work for them.
This idea that the government is against the people is how the US always justify regime change, and I think to pull that shit in a democracy is extra crazy.
America has this idea that it can get countries to like them more and be more liberal by being extra aggressive with them, and I don't know how any time we need to see that the exact opposite happen.
The regime can now go, "all your suffering is the USA's fault, totally not us". Trump has given them years of propaganda material. No chance of the mandatory hijab laws and the "no women in stadiums" law getting repealed now for decades.
I don't have to imagine it because it's the right decision.
Why don't you imagine China invading and occupying Canada while the US uses asymmetric warfare in an effort to avoid nuclear war while still working to expel the occupying forces. Would Canada be wise to side with China in that scenario? Hell no they wouldn't, they'd just be creating a permanent hostile neighbor and guaranteeing long-lasting conflict and instability. Which is exactly what has been happening in both Iraq and Afghanistan.
The last elections had the lowest participants to date, there is no one to vote for when every new candidate is no more than a new face, they have the same policy set for them by one bigger, I'm honestly tired of this being labeled as a US propaganda or being anti US is the only/better option without even thinking how bad the situation would be for Iraqis.
The point is supplyoing the military with a bigger budget and more money to lose / pad congress's wallets. It makes 100% sense when you know this.
Low turnout doesn't turn a government illegitimate either.
And I didn't label you as anything.
Looks like the Pentagon staffer resigning might have been in the works for months and it's just bad timing.
This entire situation was Trump's doing. He's going to keep making everything worse for Iraq, until he's removed from power.
Do you really believe another president would be fine with them being kicked out and giving Iran free reign in the region?
Another president likely wouldn't have assassinated Sulemeini.
If reporting is to believed that option has been on the table for few decades now.
No was stupid or insane enough to order to hit, until now that is.
The US was kicked out under Obama and generally left.
They obviously came back because it's hard to really get rid of American troops for good, but the US generally just packed up and leave, so it is possible to imagine a US president that when a sovereign country ask them to remove their troops from their country they don't just say "make me".
This is so embarrassing honestly. Does sovereignty even mean anything anymore?
Okay dude. I guess that the Iranian foreign minister is also trolling then?
Yep, and we could have stayed away had the Iraqi Security Forces took that job seriously but no amount of training can fix that corruption and incompetence. I was there in 2003, 2005 and 2007. We all said it's futile to try and stand up a capable force. There is one small unit of about 1-2 thousand fighters that's not Kurds worth their weight in ability.
Everyone I've discussed this with who were either on MTT teams or details that specifically focused on training have said the same thing and their tours were much more recent.
It's one of the points of the SFABs the Army is pushing to give them (Americans in those BDEs) much more training more specifically tailored to their (Iraqis) requirements.
I personally think we should just have a really strong embassy with QRF Forces in Qatar or Kuwait and leave both Iraq and Afghanistan.
We've tried the conventional approach, Nation building approach, Counter Insurgency, and now advisory approach and nothing works with that region.
I'm not a fan of Iran at all. But the gentleman's earlier comments about China invading Canada is straight to the point.
You know things are bad if Israel backs away from it entirely.
Man, you really fucked up big time if even this guy, of all people, is throwing you under the bus:
Man, you really fucked up big time if even this guy, of all people, is throwing you under the bus:
lol, the sharpie... never noticed that. Like, that makes it even MORE ominous... THE SPARK, its almost to the FINAL STAGE?!?!!@@#!!!
and his shifty ass eyes.
I reckon this is why Bolton's come out of the woodwork again, but not for the reasons some have stated.
Trumps move has strengthened Iran, united it internally and pushed Iraq even further towards Iranian influence.
Israel knows this, everyone else other than the Trump admin know this, Bolton knows this, and is fuming.
All just MHO, obviously.
Trumps move has strengthened Iran, united it internally and pushed Iraq even further towards Iranian influence.
Israel knows this, everyone else other than the Trump admin know this, Bolton knows this, and is fuming.
All just MHO, obviously.
Bibi was cheerleading the news once it broke and hyping Trump up. I honestly think a member of the security cabinet pulled him aside and carefully explained to him the implications of the event with its potential consequences and here we are.
The US have not really tried the peaceful approach in the region, I think it's worth a try.
Both Israel and Saudis are backing away from this. It's been known for years that hitting Suleimani was a huge no go, the shit stain in the whitehouse and his neocons have no idea wtf they're doing.
What sovereignty are you even talking about? This is a country that's ruled by Iran.
OP
OP
Haven't seen this posted yet, but in response to Trump's threat of 52 targets Hassan Rouhani (Iran's President) seems to have implied they have 290 possible targets. 290 is the amount of people killed when the US shot down Iran Air Flight 655 on 3 July 1988
When you kept egging on a war with Iran for years, but then realise it might actually happen.
Yeah it's idealized, it's a movie. And from what I remember of how it ends, and more importantly when it came out, it was about not jumping into another nation's conflicts with only an entry point and no notion of what will happen after. Seems relevant given recent events too.Who decide if the government work for or against the benefit of the people?
You?
The US government?
What do you think the message then?
That they didn't support the Taliban enough?
It's a bit of a revisionist history too by the way, the US was arming Jihadists there before the Soviet invasion, Charlie Wilson and the Reagan administration just ramped up that support
Operation Cyclone - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
- Status