Discussion in 'The War Room' started by VivaRevolution, May 16, 2018.
Not really. What you're seeing now is an Iraqi army that isn't a Western social experiment.
No, but those aren't shiite built abrams or humvees.
I was going to say we should go back to the original purpose of the thread, but the title, the stuff you posted about Sadr and your synopsis at the end don't really fit together.
Sadr isn't calling for war with Iran, he seems fairly pro-iranian as far as Iraqis go.
Setting up democracy is what's led to Sadr gaining power. A country like Iraq aren't likely to have many Justin Trudeau type candidates. Pretty much everything about that country seems like a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" kinda scenario.
What a suprise. A response free of substance. You're like 10 of 10 o those today.
Of course Sadr is pro-Iranian. He is Shiite.
The rest of what you described is called unintended consequences, and why all military adventurism is doomed to failure, and why we should fight in defense, not offense.
I wouldn't ever give a serious response to that drivel. It would legitimise it as a reasonable argument.
Netanyahu should just go away
Soo.... Pulling the only stabilizing military power... The literal only thing keeping that country together.... Then wondering why it collapsed in under 2 years is your idea of "drivel". Got it. Thanks for clearing that up, champ.
I remember back in 05 or 07 when Saddam Hossein was hanged by the courts, the crowd where yelling something like.
Then Sadam said something like "eh Muqtada your face is that all you got Muqtada and the hell that is Iraq!
I think the best analogy for wars in the middle east is that of a retard who can't stop sticking his penis in beehives. Our politicians have done it a few times, it didn't go well. Now they're thinking about doing it again and there isn't a tard wrangler in sight to stop them.
I wish I had the energy for this, but what do you say? Inability to learn is an excuse if you're a stupid individual, an assumption that lets a lot of very vicious motherfuckers in US politics off the hook way too easily. There are truly stupid people in every administration, but they are far outnumbered by people who aren't stupid at all, but simply do not care about human lives at the individual level. The real tragedy of US politics - politics in general, but we're on the topic of US right now - is the fundamental lack of skin in the game. Nobody feels like they have anything to lose by making catastrophic policy decisions. The accountability is non-existent. When was the last time a high-profile public servant - that's what these cunts are, public servants - ended in jail for a major fuckup? And I'm not talking small-timers like Rod Blagojevich or whatever. These people feel invincible, and - as a public servant - that's the last thing you should be able to feel. There is zero attribution - only unending blame-shifting between the parties.
Be a hella different story if we were to introduce guillotine for major policy fuckups.
Skin in the game. There is NONE.
SAdr is not pro Iranian. HE is an Iraqi nationalist who wants both the US and Iran out.
He would not have won if super pacifist sustain d
Well shit. It's time for Murica to start arming ISIS again. I'm sure SA and Turkey will help, even Israel
He's absolutely pro Iranian. Those people aren't really nationalistic, so "Pro-Iranian" isn't a good description. He's Pro-Shia.
Obama campaigned on bringing the troops home didnt he? Pulling out of Iraq during the Obama admin created ISIS, along with Hillary and the said admin actually arming them to topple Assad.
Sure toppling Saddam paved the way but Obama and Hillary are equally culpable.
Bolton supported the war because he is a hawk. But putting the blame on him as ambassador is ignorant.
He is fervently anti Iran. Iran is pissed he won. He wouldn't of won unless the super pacifist Al-Sistani wouldn't have told the Shia to vote for Sadrs bloc. SAdr basically wants to run Iraq himself after Sistani passes away(may that be 20 years from now), and run it alone without having to say yes to anyone. His demobilized Mahdi militia is seperate from the vast and numerous Iranian backed popular mobilization units.
He went and talked to MBS from Saudi Arabia of all damn people. That was a jaw dropping moment. His ticket is full of communists, secularists, and most any Sunni who voted voted for him.
In sadr city Baghdad, guess what the victory chants in the streets were. The chants were "No No to Iran"
I'll answer any question you got
Lol at the Shiite Al-Sadr being anti-Iranian, and pro-Saudi.
The idea that Muqtada Al Sadr is pro Saudi is frankly absurd. He may differ with Iran on what Iraq's relationship with the Saudi's should be, and he might disagree with Iran on several things, but he is far from anti Iranian. Al Sadr is still in the position he's in because of no one other than Iran.
You know it is honestly kind of nuts when you think about the series of events that had to unfold for Iran to end up with a land corridor from Iran to Lebanon.
10 years ago I would have said someone is insane if they thought Iran could defeat Israel in a war.
With Shiite Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon, being reunited as the middle East's imperial boarders decay, and 7 years of battle in Syria hardening and battle testing Hezbollah and Iranian Revolutionary Guard, combined with PMU forces in Iraq, it is almost hard to envision how Israel would win that war.
Bush admin put in place the withdrawl timeline ; it's called the Status of Forces agreement. Obama just followed through with the plan that Bush signed off on.
Separate names with a comma.