"American officials" give me a pain in various parts of my anatomy. They are major contributors to world chaos because they aren't aware of the discipline of logic, not to mention ancient or recent history. So ISIS should be allowed to run rampant, because we object to Iran helping to stop them? In fact, ISIS exists solely because the USA destabilized much of the Arab world with its mindless interventions there. Oh, and our precision drone missiles never hit civilians, right? Give me a break... Geeez!
1
The Kurds lose again and we do little to help them while the Shiites get arms from both the US through Iraqi government and from Iran. Sunnis turn to ISIL because Syria and Iraq has disenfranchised them. Where exactly does US fit in? What happened to Neocon promise to eliminate axis of evil? Iran is stronger than ever and North Korea has Nukes to sell Iran, ISIL or whomever.
Putin keeps inching Russia closer to all out war footing while our focus is kept on ISIL and Iran.It would seem that is where the axis of evil really is.
Putin keeps inching Russia closer to all out war footing while our focus is kept on ISIL and Iran.It would seem that is where the axis of evil really is.
"In the Tikrit operation, General Suleimani was close at hand to help oversee the offensive led by Iranian-backed Shiite militia leaders that make up more than two-thirds of the pro-government force.
His leadership did not go unnoticed in Washington. “We are watching,” General Dempsey said."
Suleimani is the same guy that oversaw the supply and use of Iranian arms by Shiite forces in Iraq against Americans and supplying roadside bombs that killed and maimed American forces in Afghanistan.
Now we are providing air support for Suleiman led Iranian forces in their drive to take control of Iraq while avoiding attacking Syrian forces who continue to bombard their people with barrel bombs filled with explosives and ball bearings designed to inflict maximum injury because Syria is supported by Iran..
Meanwhile in Geneva we are negotiating a deal that will enable Iran to maintain the capability to produce nuclear weapons at some time of their choosing.
In response Sunni countries are compelled to support ISIS since they are the only force resisting the Iranian takeover of the ME even though ISIS also posses a threat to them but not as great as Iran does now.
While all this is going on Gen. Dempsey is "watching"......in Washington.
His leadership did not go unnoticed in Washington. “We are watching,” General Dempsey said."
Suleimani is the same guy that oversaw the supply and use of Iranian arms by Shiite forces in Iraq against Americans and supplying roadside bombs that killed and maimed American forces in Afghanistan.
Now we are providing air support for Suleiman led Iranian forces in their drive to take control of Iraq while avoiding attacking Syrian forces who continue to bombard their people with barrel bombs filled with explosives and ball bearings designed to inflict maximum injury because Syria is supported by Iran..
Meanwhile in Geneva we are negotiating a deal that will enable Iran to maintain the capability to produce nuclear weapons at some time of their choosing.
In response Sunni countries are compelled to support ISIS since they are the only force resisting the Iranian takeover of the ME even though ISIS also posses a threat to them but not as great as Iran does now.
While all this is going on Gen. Dempsey is "watching"......in Washington.
1
Iran is taking the fight to Isil; it is supplying arms and personnel to the Iraqi forces and we see this as a problem because? Iran is becoming a power in the region. Considering that 14 year investment in American blood, training and billions spent, the US must conclude the problem cannot be solved by western intervention; sectarianism is a fact that has not been addressed by the west and has excasbebated it by creating artificial barriers and imposing western ideals upon non-western countries. Perhaps seeing Iran as a vehicle to promote stability in the region may be the best US alternative. As with Sadam’s reign, for better or worse, Iraq was stable and did not present a threat to the US; let Iran be Sadam reincarnated and become the policeman in their backyard! How many more failures must the US endure before an epiphany occurs—The Middle East is best handled by the Middle East!!!!!
4
At least Iran supply arms to Iraq army which is fighting ISIS, in contrast most of US arms finished in hands of ISIS either by defecting army or via six billions of mostly US weapons sent to fuel civil war in Syria by Saudi Arabia, Qatar and other Arab emirates - now ISIS have all most of them. Instead of welcoming positive role that Iran is playing gin this conflict against insane radical Sunnies (and following Saudi interpretation of Islam), US continues treating Iran as arch-enemy. It is just flat stupid and would result in many more victims of ISIS.
3
Or....Iran is succeeding where we have not.
Why does it surprise anyone that military trained in Tehran might understand the region better than a guy from Louisville?
Why does it surprise anyone that military trained in Tehran might understand the region better than a guy from Louisville?
5
The real threat to the US is Iran. Islamic State is like a bunch of Mad Max land pirates that number at most one hundred thousand. When Iran wipes them out and solidifies the Iran, Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon empire and works closely with Russia and China, the US will face a greater threat than the former USSR. If the US does not stop this axis of evil in its formative state and fail to put together our own partnership, we could have a second cold war that could turn hot at any time.
2
I think the Generals you talked to are kinda illiterate! Fateh 110 is a guided missile and is very good for Urban conflicts!
"Iran has deployed advanced rockets and missiles to Iraq...they are not precision guided..."
If they are not precision guided, they are nothing like advanced rockets.
And Shia Iran's possible intentions might also be anything but advanced. Killing Sunni Iraqis in general has been on the Persian agenda for a long time. Not to mention the fact Saddam Hussein's Sunni family is from the Tikrit area.
Perhaps bold moves like moving Fajr-5 and Fate-110 missiles into Iraq is a sign that Iran plans to pull a Putin-like move in Iraq. Possibly as soon as the ink is dry on the Obama Administration's, "legacy" nuclear treaty.
If they are not precision guided, they are nothing like advanced rockets.
And Shia Iran's possible intentions might also be anything but advanced. Killing Sunni Iraqis in general has been on the Persian agenda for a long time. Not to mention the fact Saddam Hussein's Sunni family is from the Tikrit area.
Perhaps bold moves like moving Fajr-5 and Fate-110 missiles into Iraq is a sign that Iran plans to pull a Putin-like move in Iraq. Possibly as soon as the ink is dry on the Obama Administration's, "legacy" nuclear treaty.
1
How dare Iran impinge upon the US market share of international warfare. We spent a lot of capital, financial and human, to destabilize Iraq and most of the Middle East. Iran should just mind its own business and try to usurp our hard earned spoils.
4
Iraqi war was israeli invention.
Just before the invasion of Iraq, Mr. Netanyahu testified in-front of Congress that removing Saddam Hussein would have "...
Enormous, positive reverberations throughout the region."
This is the very man who was greeted with starry-eyed adulation this week as he sought to give us further guidance.
What was that quote by W? "Fool me once ... er ... umm...we can't get fooled again".
Amen.
Just before the invasion of Iraq, Mr. Netanyahu testified in-front of Congress that removing Saddam Hussein would have "...
Enormous, positive reverberations throughout the region."
This is the very man who was greeted with starry-eyed adulation this week as he sought to give us further guidance.
What was that quote by W? "Fool me once ... er ... umm...we can't get fooled again".
Amen.
2
Dear American Officials this is their war not ours. And if they take control of it so be it!
Get over yourselves as you have proven over and over again that your own control issues are damaging your home country and not helping theirs!
Get over yourselves as you have proven over and over again that your own control issues are damaging your home country and not helping theirs!
2
Oh well, let's hope the Iranian juvenile varsity team beats the Islamic State junior varsity team. Villanova, or Duke? May the best team win.
It strikes me I'd rather deal with Iran than ISIS. Truth is that there is going to be a consolidation of power within the Islam Middle East and North America. My assessment is Iran is far more advanced and rational to deal with than ISIS. The Middle East is like a child growing up. When they become adults, with whom would you rather deal? We have an outdated notion that with troops, airplanes and aircraft carriers, we can dominate the world. It isn't rational and not born out of experience. When do we become more realistic about our relative position in the world?
2
Why deal with either!
2
Ah, the seemingly endless joys of "leading from behind."
3
It is truly difficult to determine whether these arms will be used to fight violent extremists or to further the clashes between the Sunni, Shiite and Sufi factions regarding religious and cultural differences...let us hope it is to destroy ISIS extremists.
His leadership did not go unnoticed in Washington. “We are watching,” General Dempsey said.
Did anyone really make the US the world's policeman, or is this just another one of those PR tactics we've so famous for, that if we keep repeating the same lie over and over enough it will become mistaken for the truth?
If our government gave half the amount of consideration to things as they are going here at home, as they do to world events that really aren't our business; maybe we'd be in a better and more capable position to lend a hand if anyone felt were to ask for it, as opposed to our usual manner or just assuming and thrusting our big nose in where it doesn't belong.
Iran has far more at stake as to what's happening in its own backyard as we do, isn't it only right that they should be there without having to listen to us always being critical of them or anyone else who assumes to have any degree of concern for what goes on in this world besides us. It's hard to disguise our own motivations as anything other than self-serving, especially give the fact that we always do so from our typical removed and comfortably safe position here at home.
Did anyone really make the US the world's policeman, or is this just another one of those PR tactics we've so famous for, that if we keep repeating the same lie over and over enough it will become mistaken for the truth?
If our government gave half the amount of consideration to things as they are going here at home, as they do to world events that really aren't our business; maybe we'd be in a better and more capable position to lend a hand if anyone felt were to ask for it, as opposed to our usual manner or just assuming and thrusting our big nose in where it doesn't belong.
Iran has far more at stake as to what's happening in its own backyard as we do, isn't it only right that they should be there without having to listen to us always being critical of them or anyone else who assumes to have any degree of concern for what goes on in this world besides us. It's hard to disguise our own motivations as anything other than self-serving, especially give the fact that we always do so from our typical removed and comfortably safe position here at home.
6
American officials worried about killing civilians? Can you say, "cognitive dissonance"?
4
"First Iran came for the Jews, and no one did anything. Then they came for the Christians, and no one did anything...."
Who doesn't learn the lessons of history is condemned to repeat them, someone said. Another deep thinker, Tacitus, was also on point: "We have made a desert, and called it 'peace.' " Untreated cancer will soon corrupt the entire body, and we know how that ends. Dr. Obama should be sued for malpractice, today.
Who doesn't learn the lessons of history is condemned to repeat them, someone said. Another deep thinker, Tacitus, was also on point: "We have made a desert, and called it 'peace.' " Untreated cancer will soon corrupt the entire body, and we know how that ends. Dr. Obama should be sued for malpractice, today.
3
That Iran has stepped up its support for the Shiite militias is worrisome because it will only add fuel to the sectarian fire. They had committed atrocities against Sunnis in the past. If Iran bolsters their support, they see no incentive to share power. Fighting ISIS needs the support of the Sunnis and Saddam Hussein's former soldiers and officers.
It just shows that Iran is desperate for influence in Iraq without thinking about the long-term consequences of its zero-sum game. We don't expect Iraq be stable anytime soon!
It just shows that Iran is desperate for influence in Iraq without thinking about the long-term consequences of its zero-sum game. We don't expect Iraq be stable anytime soon!
2
Armchair experts, across the ocean and miles from the battlefield, can postulate all they want about the way others fight an enemy. War is not a pretty little game on a board. Even with precision guided weapons, "collateral damage", that sanitized western word used to describe innocent dead men, women and children, is a part of modern warfare.
We may cheer on one side or the other, and even provide weapons and logistical help, but we are not directly effected by the battle. ISIS is not going to slip into Peoria, Great Falls or Scottsdale to behead, burn and kill.
Real people, living in countries near ISIS, need to decide whether they will run away, ignore or face this enemy. These people are directly affected by ISIS and only they can defeat ISIS - both physically and psychologically.
We may cheer on one side or the other, and even provide weapons and logistical help, but we are not directly effected by the battle. ISIS is not going to slip into Peoria, Great Falls or Scottsdale to behead, burn and kill.
Real people, living in countries near ISIS, need to decide whether they will run away, ignore or face this enemy. These people are directly affected by ISIS and only they can defeat ISIS - both physically and psychologically.
13
As the mounds of bodies mass-murdered by ISIS show, "the people" are utterly incapable of defeating ISIS. Even the well-equipped Iraqi Army abandoned its tanks and armored Humvees to ISIS, rather than fight. The pesh merga can not handle it solo, either, and USAF and coalition airstrikes cannot root out ISIS from entrenched positions in every basement and bunker. Mosul is a city of 2,000,000, by the way -- ISIS conquered it with a mere 800 killers in pickup trucks. That will be The Main Event.
Dear NYT, pick one! On the one hand, you have decried the seeming reluctance of the locals to take on ISIS, that ominous threat to civilization itself. But now that the locals have roused themselves from their lethargy, you complain that their weapons might result in the deaths of innocent civilians. Oh my! News flash: Civilians die in every war. They always have and they always will. That's what a war is; it's not a sporting event with the combatants on the field and the spectators safely watching from the stands. The US didn't have any "precision-guided" weapons in WW2, and undoubtedly killed hundreds of thousands of civilians, some by accident (liberating France, Holland and Belgium), and for those we didn't care about (Dresden, Hamburg, Tokyo), very much on purpose. Time to step back and let those with the most at stake sort things out. That's a far better scenario than sending our own citizens into the morass.
12
US air attacks accompanied by collateral damage, too, but it doesn't bother US military officials. So, why has this caused so much attention on Iran? If we talk about it, let's talk about all countries which have a similar bug.
9
At least someone is actively fighting ISIS! Thanks Iran.
12
I do not understand all the critics of the President, who seem to be coming out of the woodwork here. What would they have us do? Go back in? Bomb the living daylights out of that country? Take on Iran? "Send in the Marines?"
Here is the ugly truth: This is a religious war playing out in countries which were literally created by the West (the Sykes-Picot Agreement) and which paid no attention to the cultural and religious history of the region.
This is not our fight.
Here is the ugly truth: This is a religious war playing out in countries which were literally created by the West (the Sykes-Picot Agreement) and which paid no attention to the cultural and religious history of the region.
This is not our fight.
6
Obama could begin by rattling a saber now and then, rather than making speeches about Liberal hot-button issues re: sexuality, abortion, civil rights, and Ferguson. The acme of his war-fighting wrath was something about "crossing a red line in the sand." Then the mirage evaporated.
Absolutely. And we set it all in motion with our invasion of Iraq and pullout leaving Malaki an Iranian Shite in charge. And what long term help did we give the moderates in Syria and Libya? Isis will be defeated and guess who will fill power vacuum - Kurds, Iran and Turkey.
1
Hard to see why the administration is expressing so much concern. Washington throughout the Libyan uprising, the "Arab Spring" and the civil war in Syria has abdicated leadership and meaningful influence over events. The result has been chaos throughout the Middle East. If Iran has moved to fill the vacuum left by Obama relatively tepid actions in Iraq and with respect to Daesh generally, there is only one party to blame.
4
Utter hypocrisy. Really? Didn't seem that collateral damage was a big deal when the Falluja fighting was going on. Or anywhere else in Iraq when the US and the Brits were there.
What are the Iraqis supposed to do with ISIS? Sit there and wait till the GOP wakes up and acts responsibly? No, they have to take matters in their own hands. The irony is that Iran is the only ally the US has in Iraq. God forbid Israel is going to do anything positive in the area.
What are the Iraqis supposed to do with ISIS? Sit there and wait till the GOP wakes up and acts responsibly? No, they have to take matters in their own hands. The irony is that Iran is the only ally the US has in Iraq. God forbid Israel is going to do anything positive in the area.
7
The GOP never went to sleep, it just had to wait until the 2010 Midterms, and then the 2014 Midterms, to regain control from pacifist Democrats. In 2016 it will take back the White House, as Iran knows, and fears (as does Russia.) That's why the Iranians are so put out by a concise letter from a freshman Senator, and 46 others -- the party's over. When did Iran embark on its nuclear weapons program? In 1992, per the last wishes of its original gangster, Ayatollah Khomeini, the pal of Jimmy Carter.
The GOP has never woken up. It is still in that pre-Iraq stupor that got us in trouble in the first place. They think that the only solution is military confrontation, the likes that ended up in defeat in every conflict since Korea.
They might as well get what they can from Iran. Most report that USA support is all promises, as it has been in Syria. The USA can talk a good game.
2
You might recall that the US "support and promises" included invading Iraq in 2003, toppling and overseeing the execution of its leader, firing its army and police forces, occupying the nation for 10 years, holding elections, sacrificing nearly 5000 American lives, and spending over $1.5 trillion. If that proves anything, it's that talk is probably the best route for the US in the region.
1
Assume ISIS has its caliphate in peace. Radical Western Muslims wouldn't get military experience there because there'd be no fighting going on Maybe they'd get the same training they now get in Pakistan. Not much of a threat to the U.S. The atrocities would similarly decline, since they wouldn't be at war with their neighbors. Of course, there would be an extremist Sunni fundamentalist nation with no respect for human rights. Kind of like the Shiite version of the same thing, known as Iran.
A bunch of warring Scorpions in a bottle, and the US can't resist sticking its head in it. No harm because we are brain dead.
What could go wrong?
A tax on our cheap oil would fund a Manhattan type project on alternative energy and allow us to largely ignore Middle East conflicts.
What could go wrong?
A tax on our cheap oil would fund a Manhattan type project on alternative energy and allow us to largely ignore Middle East conflicts.
1
this is and has always been a sunni/shiite thing. We should just get out of the way. The only way ISIL will get handled is not going to be by our way of doing things. It will be messy and not geneva convention, because that is the nature of ISIL.
1
.. and it will get "better"... or should I say "bitter"...
...When Obama concludes a Nuclear Deal with Iran the Middle East will go "beserk !" ...
Iran is already scouting out a position on the Golan Heights adjacent to Israel...
The Israelis will never tolerate Iranian Missiles on the Golan... = Rx. for WAR !
The Israelis will never trust Iran not to obtain Nuclear Arms - result Israeli Nukes ready to launch at a moments notice of Iran pointing Missiles at Israel..
The Sunni Arabs ( Saudi Arabia & Gulf countries) obtaining Nuclear Weapons to counter Iran... ready to be utilized "at a moments notice" ..
"Goodbye NPT" ( Nuclear Proliferation Treaty) - as other countries in other parts of the World obtain Nuclear Weapons - Japan/ S. Korea vs. North Korea / ..... Taiwan vs. China ?Eastern Europe vbs. Russia ?
Hey Obama do you still have your Nobel "Peace" Prize.. ? or did you spend the money already ... ??
...When Obama concludes a Nuclear Deal with Iran the Middle East will go "beserk !" ...
Iran is already scouting out a position on the Golan Heights adjacent to Israel...
The Israelis will never tolerate Iranian Missiles on the Golan... = Rx. for WAR !
The Israelis will never trust Iran not to obtain Nuclear Arms - result Israeli Nukes ready to launch at a moments notice of Iran pointing Missiles at Israel..
The Sunni Arabs ( Saudi Arabia & Gulf countries) obtaining Nuclear Weapons to counter Iran... ready to be utilized "at a moments notice" ..
"Goodbye NPT" ( Nuclear Proliferation Treaty) - as other countries in other parts of the World obtain Nuclear Weapons - Japan/ S. Korea vs. North Korea / ..... Taiwan vs. China ?Eastern Europe vbs. Russia ?
Hey Obama do you still have your Nobel "Peace" Prize.. ? or did you spend the money already ... ??
2
Thank goodness the Free World's "greatest generation" that managed to suppress and defeat simultaneously both German fascism and Japanese expansionism in 3 1/2 years on battlefields encompassing the globe are mostly dead & gone and are no longer able to bare witness to what their grandchildren have failed to do against an wholly inferior force on an infinitesimally smaller piece of real estate over a vastly lengthened time frame...
Now who do you think is really worried about Iran's increased exports of weapons? Let me see. Well the USA would be number one, Russia, number two, China, Great Britain, France, Germany, etc., etc., etc. The reason why is simple. These are the nations ranked according to their military exports. It seems that the more prosperous nations in the history of this world have always been the ones with the largest Military Industrial Complexes (MIC). If a nation is to remain economically strong it will need to continuously expand its MIC. The worst part of this focus on economic growth via continued expansions of MICs will most likely be that which results in a massive failure for the human race some time in the next one hundred years or so.
It's no secret that after Israel is extirpated, Iran wants to nuke-blackmail Saudi Arabia into submission to gain control over Mecca and Medina. After that, moderate Turkey is the next target. By then Saudi Arabia will have its own nuclear weapons as a counter-weight, as it has promised many times.
Had Israel not bombed Iraq's Osirik nuclear reactor many years ago, and the nuke reactor being built near Damascus by the North Koreans several years ago, the scenario in the Mideast today now would be much more dire. Iran is continuing what Iraq and Syria failed to do, and will also suffer a pre-emptive strike by Israel.
Had Israel not bombed Iraq's Osirik nuclear reactor many years ago, and the nuke reactor being built near Damascus by the North Koreans several years ago, the scenario in the Mideast today now would be much more dire. Iran is continuing what Iraq and Syria failed to do, and will also suffer a pre-emptive strike by Israel.
and we know how much the US government cares about Iraqi civilians.....
4
Netanyahu is correct, Israel ceded land in Lebanon, Iran filled the void with Hezbollah and missiles, Israel ceded Gaza, Iran again fills it with terrorists and arms them with Missiles. Not one more inch !!
Iran and Turkey are dark horses among supporters of ISIS. Nobody knows what their real intentions of participating into this conflict are.
Iran and Turkey are dark horses among supporters of ISIS. Nobody knows what their real intentions of participating into this conflict are.
2
THERE seems to be a lot of debate on who the Kurds are.
Here is an excerpt from Wiki:
"The Kurds are an "Ethnic Iranian Group" in the Middle East, mostly inhabiting a contiguous area spanning adjacent parts of modern-day Iran, Iraq, Syria, and Turkey. They are Culturally and Linguistically closely related to the Iranian peoples and, as a result, are often themselves classified as an Iranian people.
The Kurdish languages belong to the northwestern sub‑group of the Iranian languages, which in turn belongs to the Indo-Iranian branch of the Indo-European family".
Their Customs, Food, Music and Flag closely resemble Iranian counterparts and they celebrate the Iranian New Year "Nowruz" on March 21, as their New Year.
Here is an excerpt from Wiki:
"The Kurds are an "Ethnic Iranian Group" in the Middle East, mostly inhabiting a contiguous area spanning adjacent parts of modern-day Iran, Iraq, Syria, and Turkey. They are Culturally and Linguistically closely related to the Iranian peoples and, as a result, are often themselves classified as an Iranian people.
The Kurdish languages belong to the northwestern sub‑group of the Iranian languages, which in turn belongs to the Indo-Iranian branch of the Indo-European family".
Their Customs, Food, Music and Flag closely resemble Iranian counterparts and they celebrate the Iranian New Year "Nowruz" on March 21, as their New Year.
4
Quite interesting that American officials claim concern about Collateral Damage, (Civilian Casualties) because of Iran's potential use of non precision guided missiles in the fight in Iraq against ISIS. I believe the number of civilian casualties caused by our invasion of Iraq in 2003 is estimated from a low of 66,000 to as high as 174,000. Perhaps in the future these officials will think about this prior to starting yet another war.
3
Choose one: collateral damage of civilians used by terrorists as human shields, or mass graves of civilians regularly murdered by the terrorists we refused to attack lest there be collateral damage.
The civilians themselves implore the US to attack early, and often. It's the only chance they have to survive.
The civilians themselves implore the US to attack early, and often. It's the only chance they have to survive.
YUP the Us is so concerned about Collateral Damage while at the same time they fail to take care of American Vets in need!
Are not they too a consequence of war and Collateral Damage!?
Are not they too a consequence of war and Collateral Damage!?
Iran is the one doing the fighting so they get to make the rules. When we fight we employ overwhelming firepower and believe we are sent by God.
1
I can't believe that the reporter from this article could allow US commanders to say they were "concerned about collateral damage" without at least a follow up question or reminder of how many Iraqi civilians we have killed in the last ten years? Isn't it a bit late for your concern?
This very same paper reports on civilian deaths every time we use our so called "precision weapons." What about a question to these same US commanders who spent billions of our tax dollars training and equipping the Iraqi army only to have it melt away when confronted by a few thousand ISIS fighters?
Is there never any accountability for any of the seemingly endless disasters with our "strategy" in the Middle East?
This very same paper reports on civilian deaths every time we use our so called "precision weapons." What about a question to these same US commanders who spent billions of our tax dollars training and equipping the Iraqi army only to have it melt away when confronted by a few thousand ISIS fighters?
Is there never any accountability for any of the seemingly endless disasters with our "strategy" in the Middle East?
3
The real issue here is the increasing Iranian hegemony in the entire region.
2
I would give Iraq and Afghanistan to Iran if they wanted the job. Then ask for a deal in Palestine in return.
3
Ah, the good old days when Iraq and Iran were at war and there was no ISIS...
3
If history is any judge, then no matter what Iran sends the Shiite soldiers battling ISIS ,the ISIS Sunnis will carry the battle & beat back the Shiites..Iran with two times the population of Iraq could not defeat Saddam Hussein.The Sunni fighters are more dedicated to their cause than the Shiites.
The American people have to be told why we are in the middle of a religious war, between two antagonists that despise us.What do we hope to accomplish. Why are we wasting more money on a useless cause.Lets get out of there.
The American people have to be told why we are in the middle of a religious war, between two antagonists that despise us.What do we hope to accomplish. Why are we wasting more money on a useless cause.Lets get out of there.
7
yes, however iraq was also on the initial offensive and was given 35 billion in loans to pay for their war and was also given military aid from dozens of nations and iran had sanctions placed on them
iraq, was in fact given so many weapons that if it wasn't for all the aid from foreigners, they would have lost to iran a long time previously
iraq, was in fact given so many weapons that if it wasn't for all the aid from foreigners, they would have lost to iran a long time previously
1
Well don't forget in that war Saddam had help from the U.S... Just as the Saudis do now.
1
ISIL is a "paper tiger" with no industry, agriculture or even much commerce. It has money but all of its supplies have to be trucked in. There is no supply trail that we can not hit, Steady pressure that cuts off any resupply will bring them down, history or not.
When President Obama pulled all of our combat troops out of Iraq they realized that they needed assistance . We are in a much better position of influence if we continue our support.
When President Obama pulled all of our combat troops out of Iraq they realized that they needed assistance . We are in a much better position of influence if we continue our support.
Iran is the most powerful Shiite state in the region. Of course they are not going to stand by while ISIS carries out a campaign of genocide against Shiites in Iraq and Syria. And why should they? The shocking thing is the American delusion that we get to control events in the Mid-East and to pass final judgement on who gets to defend themselves, and how
12
As Johnny Mac says "you cannot be serious!" The US is worried about Iranian missiles' colatteral damage?! Two words: depleted uranium. The US was using radioactive ordnance in everything from bunker busters down to .50 cal ammunition. When the bunker busters were used, the required hazmat teams never followed, so the cities were powdered with uranium oxide. Fallujah was turned into a radioactive and chemical wasteland. But then this is Iran, the designated fear inducing enemy of the month.
It is really ironic that Iran is protecting Israel from ISIS, the newest threat to Zionism.
It is really ironic that Iran is protecting Israel from ISIS, the newest threat to Zionism.
6
Wake up anthony, Israel does not need Iran to defend them , they do ok by themselves. This is a win win for Israel, two of their antagonists, are killing each other, but then they have been doing that for a thousand years .
2
Iran is "protecting Israel from ISIS"?? Thanks Anthony, I needed a good belly laugh today!
1
Obama and his White House weaklings, I am so sick and tired of their humanistic evil values. Worrying about this and that. War is war, and Iran is doing the right thing to protect their nation from the worse monsters of the 21st Century.
So much evil was let loose on the world by taking Syria's chemical weapons away. Weakling didn't do anything. Had Obama been President during the Civil War, their wold be two separate Nations. Obama makes Woodrow Wilson look like a war monger. I only wish Obama had it in his soul to do the right thing and be a leader.
So much evil was let loose on the world by taking Syria's chemical weapons away. Weakling didn't do anything. Had Obama been President during the Civil War, their wold be two separate Nations. Obama makes Woodrow Wilson look like a war monger. I only wish Obama had it in his soul to do the right thing and be a leader.
2
Actually two nations sounds good. Obama would have thought it through and realized that the half that drags down the nation can form their own governemtn. The half that doesn't believe in science or education. James Inhofe could be their leader.
I'm very happy we aren't doing the fighting. Under Bush we created a mess that will take hundreds of years to get calm again. Plus Bush is the one who made Iran the leading power it is.
I'm very happy we aren't doing the fighting. Under Bush we created a mess that will take hundreds of years to get calm again. Plus Bush is the one who made Iran the leading power it is.
1
Sometimes being a leader means knowing when to NOT get involved in other people's battles.
1
'evil humanistic values'?
' evil was let loose by taking Syria's chemical weapons away.'
you do realize you make no sense right?
' evil was let loose by taking Syria's chemical weapons away.'
you do realize you make no sense right?
1
yes it is funny to me we are being so critical of Iran when we don't have the guts to do it. I guess we would rather have ISIS have a free road to anywhere they want to go? We are now allies of ISIS? The U.S. foreign policy becomes more and more bizarre every day. As long as we can say something negative about Iran (and Russia!) I guess everything will be okay?
5
Good job Obama...just GIVE Iraq to Iran. What a fool.
2
Choice of weapon by Iran (as long as Iran keeps control of these) makes no difference.
No doubt Iranians/Iraqis would have asked US for airstrikes if they thought that would help!
You can not ask Isis nicely "if they would mind moving on or surrendering"!
Since Iraq is not able to deal with the terrorists, it is inevitable that either US has to use air strike which are inaccurate in residential areas and also very expensive and time consuming or Iran using rockets.....which will also help reduce Iraqi's casualties, including their army, militia etc.
Seems like the obvious choice.
No doubt Iranians/Iraqis would have asked US for airstrikes if they thought that would help!
You can not ask Isis nicely "if they would mind moving on or surrendering"!
Since Iraq is not able to deal with the terrorists, it is inevitable that either US has to use air strike which are inaccurate in residential areas and also very expensive and time consuming or Iran using rockets.....which will also help reduce Iraqi's casualties, including their army, militia etc.
Seems like the obvious choice.
2
The Persian Empire under the Safavid dynasty (1501-1736) lasted longer than has the US so far. It was founded by groups including the Kurds, which is why there are Kurds in Iran today and some Kurds are allies of Iran so that Saddam was attacking them. The Safavid dynasty created Shia Islam. Its Empire included most of Iraq, which is why that is Shia today.
Iran's interest is more than just concern for a neighbor or its back yard. From Day One of the reunification of the Iran Plateau after it was torn up by the Muslim and Mongol invasions, Iran included all these areas now being fought over.
The cultural ties are strong.
The geography helps Iran's involvement, as proven by it suiting Iran's Empire there for centuries. Prior empires of Iran also included these areas too, before anybody was Muslim, so it wasn't just chance.
Ideas about restraining Iran go against culture, history, and geography. While that could be done anyway in theory, it is a hard unnatural road.
Iran's population is larger than the rest of the area combined. Its area and natural resources are huge, and it is well on the road to industrialized, for example producing over a million cars/year.
Iran's geography in the Plateau is very difficult to attack, very difficult to occupy against its population. It is geographically a natural country, and has been for 2500 years. The Romans tried but couldn't take it and hold it.
These are the fundamental reasons we will end up needing to deal with Iran.
Iran's interest is more than just concern for a neighbor or its back yard. From Day One of the reunification of the Iran Plateau after it was torn up by the Muslim and Mongol invasions, Iran included all these areas now being fought over.
The cultural ties are strong.
The geography helps Iran's involvement, as proven by it suiting Iran's Empire there for centuries. Prior empires of Iran also included these areas too, before anybody was Muslim, so it wasn't just chance.
Ideas about restraining Iran go against culture, history, and geography. While that could be done anyway in theory, it is a hard unnatural road.
Iran's population is larger than the rest of the area combined. Its area and natural resources are huge, and it is well on the road to industrialized, for example producing over a million cars/year.
Iran's geography in the Plateau is very difficult to attack, very difficult to occupy against its population. It is geographically a natural country, and has been for 2500 years. The Romans tried but couldn't take it and hold it.
These are the fundamental reasons we will end up needing to deal with Iran.
14
you forgot to mention, that IRAQ is arab and Iran is not.
1
This is Shiite V Sunni. Iran is gaining back its old empire.
lilly -- Iran is majority Persian, but also includes substantial Arab minorities. This is a truth that is much overdone.
3
Is the question: Is an atomic Persia coming to the middle east?
Not while Israel has 200 nukes, and 8 nuke-armed submarines in the Med and the Red Sea.
i dont know what worse !isis or nucleae iran .
one thing is for sure america had faild
one thing is for sure america had faild
2
Mr. Obama refuses to place American combat brigades into Iraq. He also refuses to provide the arms necessary to defeat ISIS, especially for the Syrian rebels as well as the Iraqis. The Kurds also cannot trust the United States to provide lethal arms assistance because the U.S. is fearful that doing so will create more sectarian violence and also do further harm to U.S. relations with Turkey.
The result of this fear and hesitation by the U.S. and Mr. Obama is the creation of a power vacuum that Iran is quickly filling. As American power and influence wanes others are filing the gap. Mr. Obama cannot grasp the enormity and consequences of his in-actions. He even questioned and intervened when the Israeli military sought replenishment of arms and Israel soon learned that the White House would scrutinize all the Israelis requests and purchases. What Russia, Turkey, Iran and other enemies of Israel saw and concluded was that Mr. Obama abandoned a trusted ally. When Mr. Obama refused to bomb the Syrians and punish Assad for chemical warfare the region took note of Obama's hesitation.
Mr. Obama's hesitation and withdrawal of American forces from Europe and the Mid-East are the prime causes of Mr. Putin's aggression. Now the Iranians are taking great advantage of Obama's fear of engagement.
Hesitation, fear, failure to support friends, reluctance to engage and agonizing over military decisions sends the wrong, and fateful message that America will not support allies.
The result of this fear and hesitation by the U.S. and Mr. Obama is the creation of a power vacuum that Iran is quickly filling. As American power and influence wanes others are filing the gap. Mr. Obama cannot grasp the enormity and consequences of his in-actions. He even questioned and intervened when the Israeli military sought replenishment of arms and Israel soon learned that the White House would scrutinize all the Israelis requests and purchases. What Russia, Turkey, Iran and other enemies of Israel saw and concluded was that Mr. Obama abandoned a trusted ally. When Mr. Obama refused to bomb the Syrians and punish Assad for chemical warfare the region took note of Obama's hesitation.
Mr. Obama's hesitation and withdrawal of American forces from Europe and the Mid-East are the prime causes of Mr. Putin's aggression. Now the Iranians are taking great advantage of Obama's fear of engagement.
Hesitation, fear, failure to support friends, reluctance to engage and agonizing over military decisions sends the wrong, and fateful message that America will not support allies.
8
Our friends wondered about our sanity when Bush jumped n. Remember the predictions. It will be over in 2 months. I think our allies like Obama's thoughful ways much better than the cowboy Bush. Shoot first, think later if at all.
2
Well said .. Jay ...
The World is in the state it is because of Obama's "in-actions"..
The World is in the state it is because of Obama's "in-actions"..
3
Why not offer to build non-nuclear power plants in Iran? Their premise for having a nuclear energy program is to provide power for homes and businesses. Wouldn't it be cheaper--in blood and money--to set them up with other power systems (conventional and alternative) and "wire 'em for sound?" Peace Out.
3
Both Russia, and France, offered to provide Iran all the medical isotopes that Iran claimed its nuclear program was needed for. Iran refused. France has 2 dozen or more nuclear power plants, and offered to build some for Iran. Iran refused that, too. Connect the dots.
The arms Iran sends Iraq are certainly more useful in unhinging ISIS than bean bags. Would we prefer non-lethal aid for a war?
We complain that others aren't doing enough and complain when they do.
Whining is no better a policy than hoping.
We complain that others aren't doing enough and complain when they do.
Whining is no better a policy than hoping.
7
THIS is a strange assertion and it looks as if the American officials are speaking for the Military Contractors who are losing business to Iran: "American officials fear the rockets and missiles could further inflame sectarian tensions and cause civilian casualties because they are not precision guided".
SINCE when the US Army has become so sensitive to collateral damage and escalations of sectarian tensions?
KUDOS to Iran as at least it has rolled up its sleeves and has helped the Kurds, the Shias and now helping the Sunnis to fight the Wahhabi extremists funded by the House of Saud.
SINCE when the US Army has become so sensitive to collateral damage and escalations of sectarian tensions?
KUDOS to Iran as at least it has rolled up its sleeves and has helped the Kurds, the Shias and now helping the Sunnis to fight the Wahhabi extremists funded by the House of Saud.
12
It seems that USA fears more Iran than ISIS.
Fears which are exposed in the article, which I assume are the real USA official fears, seem to me unreasonable.
The fear of the Iranian not precise rockets respect to the American ones is ridiculous, because we all remember the massacres that the “intelligent American bombs” did in the past wars.
The mair reason, for me, is that the Iranian intervention to help Iraq against ISIS would pinpoint the American static indecision on the tactic to use against ISIS, which in the meantime grows.
The other reasons are that the Iranian intervention would demonstrate that the fix American idea against its nuclear program is only a fix idea and that USA should give more confidence to Iran.
At the end USA doesn't want to fight ISIS on the ground, Iraqi forces are not capable to do it, what is wrong if Iran will do the dirty job for both?
Fears which are exposed in the article, which I assume are the real USA official fears, seem to me unreasonable.
The fear of the Iranian not precise rockets respect to the American ones is ridiculous, because we all remember the massacres that the “intelligent American bombs” did in the past wars.
The mair reason, for me, is that the Iranian intervention to help Iraq against ISIS would pinpoint the American static indecision on the tactic to use against ISIS, which in the meantime grows.
The other reasons are that the Iranian intervention would demonstrate that the fix American idea against its nuclear program is only a fix idea and that USA should give more confidence to Iran.
At the end USA doesn't want to fight ISIS on the ground, Iraqi forces are not capable to do it, what is wrong if Iran will do the dirty job for both?
5
What's worst, ISIS killing 10-15 journalists or aid workers or Iran concurring Iraq ? The difference is the level of drama and the media attention, when you kill a journalist, America would come after you, but when you kill thousand of people without the media around (Iran), America would let it happen.
1
250,000 to 650,000 civilian deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan as a result of U.S. military invasions and we're concerned that Iran's shipment of weapons to fight Daesh will "inflame sectarian tensions and cause civilian casualties"?
You're joking.
You're joking.
14
What about the bigger picture? what about other neighbors? Do you thing the Saudis, Egypt, Jordan, will sit and wait for Iran to control a neighbor? We are in a deep trouble, Iran already controls Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen, the Arabs would not like it, and when they don't like it, America is in trouble.
Of course the Iranian munitions will cause some civilian casualties. All wars cause civilian casualties. We certainly killed many Iraqi civilians during our war there, our "precision-guided" weapons notwithstanding.
6
This is a Middle East battle, and it is appropriate that it be fought by those in that region. I am not sure the sectarian conflict is ever going to be resolved without a battle to establish who controls what area. The Sunni tribes are not going to accept rule from the Shite majority, which is going to make it impossible for Iraq to function as a unified country, not to mention the issue of the Kurds who want independence. Time to undo what the Brits did and organize the country around the areas controlled by the various factions. Also, I find the reporting on the battle against ISIS to be maddening. One day it is reported that it is taking a long time, and the next there are all the concerns about civilian casualties. You can't have it both ways. A surgical operation takes longer than a scorched earth approach.
3
You really have to wonder if President Obama and the State Department are as incompetently "clueless" as they appear to be. Seriously, our entire involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq beginning with President Bush's preemptive invasion of Iraq under false pretenses has been a "debacle" of foreign policy decision making from the get go. Thanks to our continuous "fumbling of the ball" in the Middle East we're now forced to pimp off Iran in the hopes that they'll come to the rescue and save the day in Iraq. Meanwhile the Pentagon scratches their heads in disbelief. Without out a doubt the Pax Americana brand of imperialism is losing its cache and has become this bloated and ineffective mastodon; all bluster and no bite.
1
We should thank General Suleimani for his help in ridding his neighbors of the barbarians that are ISIS. Now if the general is able to keep his people from engaging in the same sort of atrocities that IS indulges in - if he can persuade his troops to be kind to the people who have been traumatized by ISIS..then we can take our "advisers", our weapons, and our money and go home. Iran is the only country in that neighborhood willing and able to handle this mess that WE created by our illegal invasion of Iraq!
7
How many times does it have to be repeated that W/Chaney/Rumsfeld etc. were explicitly warned about destabilizing the complex Middle East?
How can any American not lay the mess at THEIR fee?
And now there is the audacity to blame Obama who had to try to clean up the situation while also being blatantly harassed by the
offenders' political party!
What cockeyed universe do Obama bashers live in?
How can any American not lay the mess at THEIR fee?
And now there is the audacity to blame Obama who had to try to clean up the situation while also being blatantly harassed by the
offenders' political party!
What cockeyed universe do Obama bashers live in?
10
It always amazes me how much smarter our Times commenters are than the people we elect at most levels of government.
6
So, now there is finally a country that is helping against ISIS; yet we complain. Obviously the sectarian violence is not going to go away! Is there going to even be an Iraqi country left with the withdraw of the kurds? Probably not. Will the Sunnis and Shia leadership continue to kill each other over issues that are 1500 years old in the name of religion? Absolutely! DS down below here is right! The more missiles these two groups shoot at each other only results in less missiles available to aim at other parts of the Middle East (not just Israel). We created the black hole vacuum that is now consuming Afghanistan, Iraq, and the rest of Northern Africa. The extreme fundamentalism that filled the void due to the Bush "Mission Accomplish" hubris should have been foreseeable because Cheney, Wolfe, and Rummey all were involved with the same issues in the late 70's and 80s. So, let them kill each other. Lets cheer on Iran for their support killing their fellow arabs and Persians. Let them exhaust their citizenry. Eventually they will tire of the war, hatred, zealotry, and blood flow created by ISIS. Look at Jordan and Egypt fighting back and bombing ISIS! Why should we have exclusive right to kill their country folk and be hated!!!!
4
The assistance provided by Iran may explain the course of the current negotiations over nuclear weapons, A little of this for a little of that.
Why is it so hard to understand ? It's Iran's border. They live there. They do not want chaos next door. We should help where we can. And unlike Iran maybe we could put some energy into stopping the killing south of our border. Where it's estimated that in Mexico alone since 2007, 1000,000 people have been killed and many thousands more missing. And how many tens of thousands more killed if you add El Salvador & Honduras.
6
legalizing all drugs would fix that - it would finish the cartels..especially if we gave it away in medical settings
Yes. It will do a lot of damage to our diplomacy in the region. Get over it. They are right next door to everything that is happening and apparently are not waiting for the green light anymore from the bully nation who got the whole area into the mess it's in. If I lived there, I would be glad that one of the nations was at least trying to get rid of the viral bacteria that grew from the sickness we gave Iraq.
8
They appear to be having their own little version of the 30 Years War. Hopefully, somewhere along the way their own little version of the Enlightenment will break out.
3
Lack of leadership by the US gets filled quickly, just not in the Mid East however around the world.
Makes you wonder if Washington understands the results of their bickering and political positioning.
When the US doesn't lead resulr in bad situations.
Makes you wonder if Washington understands the results of their bickering and political positioning.
When the US doesn't lead resulr in bad situations.
2
ISIS and Iran are both strongholds of anti-American sentiment. In the short run, if they have at it, that may seem to serve our interests. But in the long run, one or the other will prevail and enhance their regional influence. The emergence of ISIS or Iran as a major regional power would likely be very bad news for us. We can live with a Muslim world that is divided. A stronger ISIS or a stronger Iran may be a foreign policy nightmare. I say be careful what you wish for..
Can any of us remember when the Mideast was "not our problem?"
Umm, maybe before the Bush's made it our problem.
Umm, maybe before the Bush's made it our problem.
4
Why the chagrin? Should Iran not defend itself against a fanatical, medieval Sunni mob and protect its fanatical, medieval Shia theocracy?
I remain clear that any US involvement in the Middle East (Syria, Iraq, Iran) leaves us bloodied and drained, the local landscape in a rubble, spawns religious fanaticism, and triggers endless sectarian violence. They kill civilians who are not of their creed, we kill civilians with our bombs and drones likely in equal numbers if not more. We have not made matters better up to now, and we will not in the future. There are only a handful of people in the entire Middle East who think our involvement is a good thing; and that too because they personally profited from our involvement. Everyone else is swearing vengeance. Over three thousand American braves sacrificed, an army of emotionally and physically scarred vets, and a trillion dollars in coin (quite a bit of it plain looted by American and other profiteers, and paid in bribes to people who agreed not to shoot at us - at least temporarily).
Why do we need this? I wish we would get out, and stay out. Not because I am unmoved by the plight of innocents in the region, but because I am convinced we are ineffectual and worsen the situation for everyone.
Kalidan
I remain clear that any US involvement in the Middle East (Syria, Iraq, Iran) leaves us bloodied and drained, the local landscape in a rubble, spawns religious fanaticism, and triggers endless sectarian violence. They kill civilians who are not of their creed, we kill civilians with our bombs and drones likely in equal numbers if not more. We have not made matters better up to now, and we will not in the future. There are only a handful of people in the entire Middle East who think our involvement is a good thing; and that too because they personally profited from our involvement. Everyone else is swearing vengeance. Over three thousand American braves sacrificed, an army of emotionally and physically scarred vets, and a trillion dollars in coin (quite a bit of it plain looted by American and other profiteers, and paid in bribes to people who agreed not to shoot at us - at least temporarily).
Why do we need this? I wish we would get out, and stay out. Not because I am unmoved by the plight of innocents in the region, but because I am convinced we are ineffectual and worsen the situation for everyone.
Kalidan
11
The sanctions on Iran to encourage it to abandon its nuclear ambitions are obviously having little or no impact on Iran's ability to do what it wants in Iraq, which leads one to question whether the sanctions are also having little or no impact on the nuclear side either.
2
Neither the Saudis, nor the Turks have put troops into Iraq or Syria. Obama is doing everything to keep US troops out. A short course in contemporary history explains why. America spent over a TRILLION dollars in Iraq and neither a functional government or military exists there today. The notion that IF the US had left 20,000 troops in Iraq everything would be OK today is insane. Besides, the US was not given a choice, per an agreement signed by GW Bush.
American boots on the ground in the Middle East is not a solution to any of the myriad problems there. We are lucky to have a President that understands this. And no leader is going to solve the Sunni-Shiite issue.
Iran is welcome to Bagdad.
Ronald Reagan supported Saddam Hussein for 8 years while he fought Iran. No one ever called for the US to get militarily involved. Let Iran fight ISIS for the next 8 years and maybe people will forget that we were foolish enough to once be militarily involved.
American boots on the ground in the Middle East is not a solution to any of the myriad problems there. We are lucky to have a President that understands this. And no leader is going to solve the Sunni-Shiite issue.
Iran is welcome to Bagdad.
Ronald Reagan supported Saddam Hussein for 8 years while he fought Iran. No one ever called for the US to get militarily involved. Let Iran fight ISIS for the next 8 years and maybe people will forget that we were foolish enough to once be militarily involved.
10
Well that makes a nice change. I recall when America sent arms to Iraq to fight its war against Iran back in the 90s, was it? The US also assisted Iraq with intelligence information and ... snort ... All rather confusing. But really, you guys should just give up and go fishing or take notice of some history. In 1953 Iran had a democratically elected President Mossadegh and the US and UK got rid of him - bcoz, well same old, same old. Don't you ever get sick of war?
12
The people who own and operate the US make money from war.
2
Is there any place in the world that the Ayatollah isn't looking to expand his reach? Has anybody checked to make certain that his mother isn't off fighting somewhere?
2
Is it not time for the U.S. to at least recognize that Iran is concerned about ISIS and is helping to combat it?
8
Well isn't this part of the Grand Bargain we're making with Iran? This time Iran supplies arms to Iraq so this time America stays above the fray in exchange for Iran temporarily agreeing to cancel their plans to turn Tel Aviv into a toxic wasteland.
I do hope that ISIS terrorists will be stopped. It should be done and the sooner it will happen the better an overall situation will be. Our country undertakes no serious actions to improve the situation for the better. This modern barbarians get stronger everyday and all civilized world should act before it`s not too late.
2
Good for Iran.
President Obama has reached out to Iran and made them our friends. The are the natural leader in the middle east region and I am happy they are taking an interest in their neighborhood.
A strong Iran will force Israel to cede land for a Palestinian State and thus we will have peace in the middle east.
Give Iran a chance.
President Obama has reached out to Iran and made them our friends. The are the natural leader in the middle east region and I am happy they are taking an interest in their neighborhood.
A strong Iran will force Israel to cede land for a Palestinian State and thus we will have peace in the middle east.
Give Iran a chance.
9
Good for the Iranians to take responsibility for assisting Iraq with weapons that might help defeat ISIS. Don't we want people in that region of the world to work together to end their common threats? Instead we continue to make Iran an effective ally in battle with whom we will not coordinate. How does the Administration and McCain think that ISIS will be defeated without Iranian on the ground assistance?
Our foreign policy is devolving more and more into theater of the absurd. Obama would not provide weapons and assistance to the Syrian opposition five years ago, and now they have been rendered almost nonexistent. We bomb ISIS in Syria and thereby assist Assad in dealing with his on the ground enemy while we again will not coordinate with Assad who we supposedly oppose. The Ukrainians are in dire straits with Russian troops (excuse me volunteers) in Ukraine assisting the separatists with weapons and combat troops, but we refuse to give the Ukrainians weapons that they need to counter the Russian incursion.
With an ally like the U.S. who needs enemies?
Our foreign policy is devolving more and more into theater of the absurd. Obama would not provide weapons and assistance to the Syrian opposition five years ago, and now they have been rendered almost nonexistent. We bomb ISIS in Syria and thereby assist Assad in dealing with his on the ground enemy while we again will not coordinate with Assad who we supposedly oppose. The Ukrainians are in dire straits with Russian troops (excuse me volunteers) in Ukraine assisting the separatists with weapons and combat troops, but we refuse to give the Ukrainians weapons that they need to counter the Russian incursion.
With an ally like the U.S. who needs enemies?
7
How many nations can conduct war like we do? Very few if any. And how much of what we do in war is a moral squeamishness, trying to minimize collateral damage to non-military targets? Yet, historically, that is pretty unusual. We try to use technology and a highly trained force to both minimize our own casualties and those of civilians. And, we have had some success in battle doing so.
But other nations don't have that technology, nor do they have forces as well trained (how much is being done by militias - essentially civilians like you and I who picked up guns and were sent to the front with only the most minimal of preparation). Without those assets, warring parties cannot afford to indulge themselves with our degree of moral squeamishness. Nor, considering the degree to which this is a sectarian struggle, does either side necessarily much care if they kill civilians.
And we might also wish to remember how the troops we trained and equipped so extensively in our methods folded and ran, abandoning their duties and equipment in Mosul to a force not even 1/10 their number. In which case we might ask ourselves what the purpose of a military force is and why it is that we have such a decades-long sorry experience in training up foreign forces that actually fight as opposed to take our money and training then run at the first opportunity.
But other nations don't have that technology, nor do they have forces as well trained (how much is being done by militias - essentially civilians like you and I who picked up guns and were sent to the front with only the most minimal of preparation). Without those assets, warring parties cannot afford to indulge themselves with our degree of moral squeamishness. Nor, considering the degree to which this is a sectarian struggle, does either side necessarily much care if they kill civilians.
And we might also wish to remember how the troops we trained and equipped so extensively in our methods folded and ran, abandoning their duties and equipment in Mosul to a force not even 1/10 their number. In which case we might ask ourselves what the purpose of a military force is and why it is that we have such a decades-long sorry experience in training up foreign forces that actually fight as opposed to take our money and training then run at the first opportunity.
3
Is anyone surprised by this? Will anyone be surprised when some of these arms fall into the wrong hands and are used in acts of terrorism against civilians? It's funny how republicans can put a spin on any issue related to terrorist organizations to claim it's directly attributable to the Obama administration and not mention a word about the eight years prior. If there's one thing they're masters of, it's finger pointing. What can be more productive than that?
3
You mean like the arms we sell to other countries. Or money we give governments actually going to fund Al Queda?
I welcome Iran into Iraq to fight ISIS. Better them than us.
And the thought that they would blow up Israel with a nuke is absurd. They would become a pariah. They, themselves would be bought to a wasteland.
I welcome Iran into Iraq to fight ISIS. Better them than us.
And the thought that they would blow up Israel with a nuke is absurd. They would become a pariah. They, themselves would be bought to a wasteland.
4
Okay, so?
Is the USA no frightened that the war can be over without their influence and without the deaths of the American soldiers?
Your leaders can calm down, the fight against ISIS will take a long time. Terrorists are too good equipped (thanks to the US support in a fight against Assad)
Is the USA no frightened that the war can be over without their influence and without the deaths of the American soldiers?
Your leaders can calm down, the fight against ISIS will take a long time. Terrorists are too good equipped (thanks to the US support in a fight against Assad)
2
I think it's rich that we're complaining about civilian casualties. Our invasion of Iraq caused 1/2 million dead Iraqis. We destroyed their country, and then did the same for Libya. Both were absolute disasters.
How about we refrain from toppling any more regimes? Though I wouldn't cry if the Saudi regime imploded.
How about we refrain from toppling any more regimes? Though I wouldn't cry if the Saudi regime imploded.
13
Like the US military never hit innocent civilians fomenting anti-American radicalisation. Talk about a blind spot ! Unbelievable hypocrisy.
8
Iraq is a sovereign state. Everything Iran is doing in Iraq is with the full consent of Iraqi government, and therefore it's not our business, nor is it Israel's.
We are not going to listen to the same fools who got us here with their brilliant strategic thinking in 2002/2003.
We are not going to listen to the same fools who got us here with their brilliant strategic thinking in 2002/2003.
8
It sounds like they are serving a very useful purpose. Better them, than us. We should thank them.
12
We unleashed "shocked and awe" in an attempt to "decaptate the regime". Ironic that we now frown upon Iran for bringing in their big guns. If we are worried that Iranian weapons are imprecise, maybe we should have led the fight with our high precision weaponry (we will dutifully classify all other deaths as "collateral damage" and our press will cheerfully report that).
4
I think the US is more concerned with the transition of influence in Iraq from US to Iran.
5
If this year is any indicator, we may be picking up Iran and India as our new allies much to the chagrin of Saudi Arabia and Pakistan.
President Obama is making a fundamental transformation - it is becoming the World's Police Commissioner instead of World's Policeman. Regional issues must be delegated to regional heavyweights. We are preserving our 18-year olds.
Kudos to President Obama.
President Obama is making a fundamental transformation - it is becoming the World's Police Commissioner instead of World's Policeman. Regional issues must be delegated to regional heavyweights. We are preserving our 18-year olds.
Kudos to President Obama.
15
When Bush was pushed into the Israel-inspired "Greater Middle East" invasion of Iraq, civilian casualties and "collateral damage" were dismissed by the likes of Donald Rumsfeld as "stuff happens", resulting in hundreds of thousands of Iraqi dead. Even today death and disfigurement from spent uranium ammunition occur in Iraq. So why the sudden concern by U.S. officials over an unknown number of Iranian rockets that are being deployed in the hope of ending ISIL/IISIS/IS massacres of Iraqis who don't follow beliefs inspired by Saudi Wahabis?
5
The present scenario in Iraq is indeed a tricky one. The U.S. is unable to send its ground forces or advisers to the battle field whereas Iran is willing to supply arms and fighters but that may result in a long term civil war. Therefore, both the U.S. and Iran should tread a cautious path and deal the matter with utmost diligence.
A heavy burden is cast on Iraq. No doubt, it is answerable to its people and eliminate ISIS. However, it should be fair and honest in its dealings with the U.S. It should update the U.S. about the help that it gets from Iran. The missiles of Iran is sure to cause collateral damage. Therefore, Iraq should take a cautious call. It should also determine whom to take advice, either the U.S. or Iran. It should not allow Iran to outsmart Iraq or the U.S. and create another problem.
A heavy burden is cast on Iraq. No doubt, it is answerable to its people and eliminate ISIS. However, it should be fair and honest in its dealings with the U.S. It should update the U.S. about the help that it gets from Iran. The missiles of Iran is sure to cause collateral damage. Therefore, Iraq should take a cautious call. It should also determine whom to take advice, either the U.S. or Iran. It should not allow Iran to outsmart Iraq or the U.S. and create another problem.
1
In reality there is now no country called Iraq.
4
Unbelievable! You guys in the States have completely lost control of the situation! Talk about snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Your current foreign policy team is clearly inexperienced and incompetent. You decided to withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan, you abstained from Syria (how's that working out?), you have no clue what to do in the mid-East or north Africa... and let's not talk too much about Ukraine... aren't you embarrassed?
9
First, leading from behind. Now trying to turn Iran into a peaceful nation. This president was unprepared for battles in Congress and even more unprepared for battles across the globe.
2
Your diatribes would be more effective if there weren't so many of them, and scattershot at that.
What, by the way, would you advise doing in Ukraine? Do you think boots on the ground would be a good idea? Or do you think we should rattle our nuclear sabres?
What, by the way, would you advise doing in Ukraine? Do you think boots on the ground would be a good idea? Or do you think we should rattle our nuclear sabres?
5
For the most part I think these are problems that can only be solved locally (our imperialist interference has proven costly in blood and treasure, and has achieved close to nothing), and I'd prefer my government focus on my own country's well-being right now, so no, I'm not embarrassed.
9
Awesome! We despise the ISIS cavemen and want them crushed. Don't we?
14
In April 2013 the Kurds sent a letter to Obama asking for military assistance. It took four (4) months for it to arrive, and then it was only..... MRE's and Kevlar vests. In summer 2014, ISIS emerged. Watch PBS Frontline, "The Rise of ISIS." What a cowardly performance by Obama, Kerry, and the Pentagon.
8
The Middle East is never going to change. It was a pain for the Roman Empire with the Jews, and now the Arabs for the Americans. History repeats itself.
3
It is not accurate nor fair to blame Obama, Kerry and the Pentagon for the rise of ISIS - the problem has been building for years. "Cowardly" is accusing without facts, just opinions.
3
Apparently only "Bush" warrants criticism by Pogo. When the shoe is on Obama's foot, then you cry about "fairness." Smell the hypocrisy. Watch PBS again, which is no friend of Bush, as everyone knows. They nailed it. "Cowardly" is letting entire countries twist in the wind as ISIS metastasizes, as we see now.
Is this the same Iran we're in negotiations with?
8
We helped start or furthered at least the sectarianism, sent a specialist in Negraponte, so we don't need to act surprised. We are the ones that promoted the Shia militias killing the Sunnis and now the Sunnis have their own little organization the ISIS, and are intent on evening the score. What did we expect the Iranians to be sending the Iraqis, flowers?
17
If Jim Webb is the Democrat presidential nominee, not an unlikely prospect with Warren as VP, then whether Jeb Bush wins or not, there will be greater military participation by America. "A stitch in time saves nine." Had America left 20,000 soldiers behind in Iraq, as the Pentagon wanted, we'd be in a much stronger position there. Oh well. Let Iran fill the vacuum, it does not seem to have another option to protect itself from ISIS infiltration if Iraq falls to ISIS.
3
Keep in mind that our military would still have us in Vietnam if they could. They haven't won a war in over 70 years. The fact is we can't afford to be the worlds cop anymore.
2
Why does the U.S. appear surprised by this? after all, it was the U.S. who toppled a Sunni, anti-Iranian regime in Iraq and propped a Shiite, pro-Iranian regime instead.
29
I agree. For decades we accepted Saddam as a dictator that kept the lid on the middle east. Now that he is gone what did we expect?
2
Iran continues to benefit and make inroads in the wake of the political vacuum of our ill-conceived and poorly prosecuted invasion and ocupation of Iraq. Iran is the major player in the region and has seized the initiative on the ground. If Iran can actually defeat and push back IS guerrillas - wo big 'ifs' - this area will be part of a greater Shiite mini-state if Iraq breaks apart and is partitioned into three autonomous states with the Sunni minority and Kurdistan, Baghdad will be beholden to the Iranian regime in Tehran. We laid the ground work and did all the heavy lifting with our blood and treasure, and Iran heaps all the rewards in poltical capital from a victory against ISS. That is historical irony to the nth degree. I wonder how the neocon and liberal hawks for the Iraq War feel now? Perhaps just a bit shocked and awed?
21
I beg to differ. We didn't lay the groundwork for anything useful in Iraq. We rushed in head first and made a big mess of a stable country. Iran is helping clean up the mess we left behind.
I do agree we threw a lot of money, several thousands of American lives, and at least a hundred thousand Iraqi civilians. All of that was a criminal waste, yet the culprits who took us into the war are comfortably retired and enjoying their wealth without any accountability.
I do agree we threw a lot of money, several thousands of American lives, and at least a hundred thousand Iraqi civilians. All of that was a criminal waste, yet the culprits who took us into the war are comfortably retired and enjoying their wealth without any accountability.
7
Yes. Exactly. Cheney's Halliburton made 36 billion off our illegal invasion of Iraq.
4
Thank you George Bush for making Iran the new regional power in the middle east. Who possibly could have foreseen this?
30
Which means that 6 years of Obama, and "bright red lines," have been utterly ineffective. Not to mention other theaters of war. Obama: "Afghanistan is the right war." New reports yesterday said ISIS is now taking over Afghanistan, just as it's doing with Boko Harem in central Africa. The "surge" worked for Bush, but for a very long time Obama refused to acknowledge that. Too much Kool-Aid? Or maybe the Democrats can blame "General Betrayus," per Hillary?
As the books by Robert Gates and Leon Panetta show, the White House can't wage war even when our backs are to the wall.
As the books by Robert Gates and Leon Panetta show, the White House can't wage war even when our backs are to the wall.
8
No one could have foreseen the events that have transpired under an Obama presidency. While you're thanking Bush, we are watching the consequences of Obama's strategies unfold.
2
Jimmy Carter. Tekrit is where the Iranians will practice for Tel Aviv.
2
Obama's naivitee and lack of leadership have created power vacuums all over the world. It is inevitable that others will seize the opportunities created by his gross incompetence in the realm of foreign affairs.
6
I think you meant GWB, not Obama.
24
"Obama's naivitee[sic] and lack of leadership have created power vacuums all over the world."
Really! And here I thought it was Bush who created the power vacuum in Iraq, aided and abetted by Paul Bremer and his hand-picked PM, al_Maliki.
Really! And here I thought it was Bush who created the power vacuum in Iraq, aided and abetted by Paul Bremer and his hand-picked PM, al_Maliki.
24
Revisionist history on your part. It was all George Bush and Dick Cheney that created this mess. NIce try, maybe you should go back to the echo chamber.
24
Now we're criticizing HOW Iraq fights ISIS and who helps? Really?
21
So Iran wants to get into Iraq and take over the mess. Let them have it. They will learn the hard way and come out weakened just like we did.
3
Iran has been able to benefit immensely from the havoc that the Islamic State has wreaked across Iraq and Syria. In Iraq, the Iranian regime has used the rise of the Islamic State as an excuse to surge thousands of troops through the porous Iran-Iraq border and notch up the violent activities of its many proxy militia groups in the country. But rather than fighting the Islamic State, Iran’s real agenda is to expand and strengthen its hold on Iraqi soil and politics
It's their land, and their fight. We have no business being there.
15
And this is why the US will reach a bad deal with Iran on nuclear weapons, or rather bad for the the US, West and the Middle East- good for Iran. For all intents and purposes, Iran has turned into a US ally since as far as the US is concerned, ISIS trumps all other concerns in the Middle East.
Unfortunately this is ignorance and US policy has been guided by such ignorance, but what is the big surprise. I assume that Bashir al-Assad will also soon become a full fledged member of the US coalition. The Butcher of Damascus will be rehabilitated and the US will continue to "watch closely" as all goes awry.
Ultimately, other US allies in the Middle East, e.g. Saudi Arabia, have reason for great concern.
Unfortunately this is ignorance and US policy has been guided by such ignorance, but what is the big surprise. I assume that Bashir al-Assad will also soon become a full fledged member of the US coalition. The Butcher of Damascus will be rehabilitated and the US will continue to "watch closely" as all goes awry.
Ultimately, other US allies in the Middle East, e.g. Saudi Arabia, have reason for great concern.
2
"Iran Sent Arms to Iraq to Fight ISIS, U.S. Says"
Is this not good news? Two of our supposed enemies are fighting each other instead of fighting us - are we expected to be upset about this? The US arms industry may be dismayed, but at least this will give some Republican senators more opportunities to appear on Sunday morning talk shows and complain - they will complain about anything.
Is this not good news? Two of our supposed enemies are fighting each other instead of fighting us - are we expected to be upset about this? The US arms industry may be dismayed, but at least this will give some Republican senators more opportunities to appear on Sunday morning talk shows and complain - they will complain about anything.
16
Another tired piece of oriented fear-mongering propaganda on the "Iran's growing influence in Iraq", don't remind your audience that 65% of Iraq is Shia and don't ask those "senior American military official[s] monitor[ing] sensitive government reports on Iran" where the IS support is coming from, why they won't tell you that IS have bank accounts in Koweit and that most of their support are coming from Sunni dictatorships allied with the US, etc. Certainly not as interesting than "scary" Iran...
22
Like the war on Iraq was precision guided.
30
It concerns me the number of posters who think that Iran is an Arab nation. Do most Yanks still not have even a basic understanding of what is going on in the Near East?
50
To answer your question, yes.
12
The Republicans certainly do not.
2
To be fair, most Iraqi Shiites are indeed Arabs, so it's not easy to sort ethnicity and race in this arena.
To be critical, many Americans can't find their own state on a map. It seems that many felt "entitled" to a high school diploma and never truly earned theirs. It's a great source of shame for us. What really surprises me is that some of these Americans are reading the NY Times. Hope springs eternal...
Inre Iran helping Iraq - more power to them. If Netanyahu wants it stopped, let him send his children to do it.
To be critical, many Americans can't find their own state on a map. It seems that many felt "entitled" to a high school diploma and never truly earned theirs. It's a great source of shame for us. What really surprises me is that some of these Americans are reading the NY Times. Hope springs eternal...
Inre Iran helping Iraq - more power to them. If Netanyahu wants it stopped, let him send his children to do it.
2
this is great. finally the money to pay for that mess isn't coming from my tax money. best news I've gotten it eons.
You can see Best smartphone Specs Here Best Smartphone Specification
You can see Best smartphone Specs Here Best Smartphone Specification
1
I'm so pleased that Iran is helping Iraq on the ground & hope the U.S. and Its allies will come to the idea that Iran could be a great assistance to fighting terrorism. And I've got another message for countries like Saudi Arabia, please stop sending trained terrorists to other lands.what goes may come around.
36
Iran is making its move. These missiles have no strategic importance in close quarter urban fighting, as mentioned in the article. Iran is preparing for the next move on the chessboard. Iran is taking advantage of the current chaos to begin to position heavy weapons in defense of the soon to be formed Shiastan nation.
Iran knows that the ISIS devils will eventually be routed. They are doing a good job of routing them. ISIS cannot stand up to a well armed professional military force. iran knows that with ISIS being so evil, no nation will oppose them in their fight against ISIS.
The missiles are not their to fight ISIS but to fight whatever comes after ISIS. Iran wants to prevent any future Sunni incursions into the new Shiastan.
The Sunni/Shia divide is taking shape. The arc of Shia influence extends to Lebanon and now south of Saudi Arabia with the fall of Yemen. That arc is pulling tighter.
Iran knows that the ISIS devils will eventually be routed. They are doing a good job of routing them. ISIS cannot stand up to a well armed professional military force. iran knows that with ISIS being so evil, no nation will oppose them in their fight against ISIS.
The missiles are not their to fight ISIS but to fight whatever comes after ISIS. Iran wants to prevent any future Sunni incursions into the new Shiastan.
The Sunni/Shia divide is taking shape. The arc of Shia influence extends to Lebanon and now south of Saudi Arabia with the fall of Yemen. That arc is pulling tighter.
3
The Sunni/Shia divide is centuries old.
Iraq under Saddam (Sunni) and his Baathist Party (Sunni) was a mix of Shia and Sunni, with a Sunni military. The US occupying force purged Baathists in the military, who joined the insurrection, then turned against Al Quaida when Petraeus was in charge, then weren't given the jobs they were promised and were frozen out under Maliki (Shia) and went over to Sunni ISIS when it invaded. That left mostly Shia militias to do the fighting, with the help of Iran, naturally. Without them Iraq would have fallen.
The US believes Iraq should be a place where Sunni, Shia and Kurds live happily together. Well, millions died when Iraq, under Saddam, attacked Iran. It's probably a US pipe dream that Sunni & Shia will hold hands and sing Kumbaya.
Iraq under Saddam (Sunni) and his Baathist Party (Sunni) was a mix of Shia and Sunni, with a Sunni military. The US occupying force purged Baathists in the military, who joined the insurrection, then turned against Al Quaida when Petraeus was in charge, then weren't given the jobs they were promised and were frozen out under Maliki (Shia) and went over to Sunni ISIS when it invaded. That left mostly Shia militias to do the fighting, with the help of Iran, naturally. Without them Iraq would have fallen.
The US believes Iraq should be a place where Sunni, Shia and Kurds live happily together. Well, millions died when Iraq, under Saddam, attacked Iran. It's probably a US pipe dream that Sunni & Shia will hold hands and sing Kumbaya.
7
Bruce Rozenblit Kansas City
Iran is making its move.
****
And our president may be helping it along with his nuclear deal. While everyone is cheering our "escape" from Bush's quagmire, either stuck in the past and/or just happy to be out of there, the rest of us are growing very concerned about what a nuclear armed increasingly powerful Iran means.
Among Iran, Russia and China, the US' role has greatly changed under Obama.
Iran is making its move.
****
And our president may be helping it along with his nuclear deal. While everyone is cheering our "escape" from Bush's quagmire, either stuck in the past and/or just happy to be out of there, the rest of us are growing very concerned about what a nuclear armed increasingly powerful Iran means.
Among Iran, Russia and China, the US' role has greatly changed under Obama.
1
US throughout in her modern history,US never play a significant role in peace maker.US always use one group up against the other and always believe winner take all approach and never believe in coexistence and peaceful solution.
5
Let's see. The United States Congress can't get itself together to decide what they want to do about Iraq. Dither, dither, dither. Then Iran, who has a real interest in protecting sacred shrines and the Shi'a population, who has been threatened with extermination by ISIS/ISIL/IS steps in and shows the kind of professional management of the Iraqi forces that the United States could never muster.
The Iranians are winning this, where the United States was ineffective and irresolute.
So what does Congress do? Scream and yell about Iranian "hegemony" and worry about "Iranian influence" in the region. What ever happened to our horror at ISIS's brutality and extremism. It seems that people think they must be defated--just not by Iran.
The hypocrisy and fecklessness of the critics of this scenario is mind-boggling. Anyone with any sense knew that the only force capable of defeating ISIS in the region was Iran. It was palpably clear. So now if Iran does engineer an ISIS defeat will we hear more outrage over . . . Iran!!!
It appears that Congress, the AIPAC toadies and the blind followers of the Netanyahu doctrine have decided that Iran is somehow worse than ISIS. Amazing. Just amazing.
The Iranians are winning this, where the United States was ineffective and irresolute.
So what does Congress do? Scream and yell about Iranian "hegemony" and worry about "Iranian influence" in the region. What ever happened to our horror at ISIS's brutality and extremism. It seems that people think they must be defated--just not by Iran.
The hypocrisy and fecklessness of the critics of this scenario is mind-boggling. Anyone with any sense knew that the only force capable of defeating ISIS in the region was Iran. It was palpably clear. So now if Iran does engineer an ISIS defeat will we hear more outrage over . . . Iran!!!
It appears that Congress, the AIPAC toadies and the blind followers of the Netanyahu doctrine have decided that Iran is somehow worse than ISIS. Amazing. Just amazing.
59
It's not the Congress who sits around and does nothing. It's Obama!!!!! He doesn't want us to get involved....He seems to be trying to get ISIS to win. He didn't do anything before January (when there was a Democratic Congress. He is the main part of the problem.
7
For weeks we've been told the president is responsible for foreign policy, right? And Congress shouldn't meddle.
Why is it so hard to hold this president responsible? Answer: Because he's so weak.
Why is it so hard to hold this president responsible? Answer: Because he's so weak.
1
So why has Congress refused to vote on authorization for action against ISIS? The President has 90 days to act. That time has expired. Obama asked Congress to act and Congress has done nothing. Nada. They are afraid to vote. Meanwhile Iran wins the war and the U.S. looks weak and foolish.
1
So their weapons aren't as efficient at killing people as ours are? Their business.
9
When George Bush trampled into Iraq with no idea of what he was doing, he turned Iraq into a vassal state of Iran. So, why would our government be surprised at a strong Iranian presence there now. Frankly, I'm happy Iran is spearheading the attack against ISIS, and do not care if it reinforces Iran's influence in Irag. That influence has existed since we ended the fiasco of the first Iraq war.
In this second Iraq war, the American People were PROMISED that there would be a grand international coatition of countries; that there would be no US ground forces; and that the local Arab countries and Turkey would provide on the ground troops. Some Arab countries have participated in air strikes; but, Saudi Arabia, with a large army and tons of cash has been virtually no help at all. Turkey has been even worse. Turkish border guards are still looking the other way as foreign fighters join ISIS, and Turkey has blatantly refused to fight ISIS. Turks also facilitated ISIS's black market trade in oil, unimpeded by their government.
In sum, Saudi Arabia is staying out of the picture like it always does; and Turkey appears to actually be on ISIS's side. I'm glad Iran is involved instead of the USA, as we can no longer afford constant no win war. We need to refocus our energies on making the lives of all US citizans better, instead of on empire building. In the meantine, the parties involved can continue to kill each other, just like they have been doing for thousands of years.
In this second Iraq war, the American People were PROMISED that there would be a grand international coatition of countries; that there would be no US ground forces; and that the local Arab countries and Turkey would provide on the ground troops. Some Arab countries have participated in air strikes; but, Saudi Arabia, with a large army and tons of cash has been virtually no help at all. Turkey has been even worse. Turkish border guards are still looking the other way as foreign fighters join ISIS, and Turkey has blatantly refused to fight ISIS. Turks also facilitated ISIS's black market trade in oil, unimpeded by their government.
In sum, Saudi Arabia is staying out of the picture like it always does; and Turkey appears to actually be on ISIS's side. I'm glad Iran is involved instead of the USA, as we can no longer afford constant no win war. We need to refocus our energies on making the lives of all US citizans better, instead of on empire building. In the meantine, the parties involved can continue to kill each other, just like they have been doing for thousands of years.
31
Apparently the only people that have a problem with this development are ISIS, Saudi Arabia, and Israel- not necessarily in that order.
Yes our Republicans have a problem because Netanyahu has a problem.
Yes our Republicans have a problem because Netanyahu has a problem.
44
Good news!
Any damage Iranians inflict on ISIS while helping out Iraq should be a straightforward win. How can we whine?
To paint it any other way is letting ISIS win, or sending our troops (+contractors) back in to muck things up again, huge loss of life and then again watch the Iraqi army melt away because they hate us more than even Shiite militias.
Seems this group is actually uniting against ISIS as an evil that must be stopped. They're bringing big guns. Hallelujah.
Any damage Iranians inflict on ISIS while helping out Iraq should be a straightforward win. How can we whine?
To paint it any other way is letting ISIS win, or sending our troops (+contractors) back in to muck things up again, huge loss of life and then again watch the Iraqi army melt away because they hate us more than even Shiite militias.
Seems this group is actually uniting against ISIS as an evil that must be stopped. They're bringing big guns. Hallelujah.
20
Exposed our impotence. We must cover that up or stand humiliated. We are very ineffectual. Re military spending, we are not getting a bang for a buck.
5
Back in the 80s, I'm sure the Soviet Union was displeased that the US sought to meddle in the affairs of Central America, even going so far as to train death squads and funnel guns through drug cartels, anything to maintain a hold on its backyard--a policy declared legitimate through the Monroe Doctrine.
You'd think the US would realize that Iran might be just as concerned with the stability of a country directly on its border, especially one where the populous is of the same religion which has been persecuted by the Sunni leadership under Saddam, some of who are now ringleaders in ISIS.
Perhaps it is even possible that Iran might actually be more concerned with collateral damage than the US is when the US deploys its cruise missiles and drones thousands of miles from its borders against foes the US citizenry cannot even distinguish from friends in the region.
The US will never be able to remove the beam from its own eye until it stops wielding sticks while shouting at others to stop wielding theirs.
You'd think the US would realize that Iran might be just as concerned with the stability of a country directly on its border, especially one where the populous is of the same religion which has been persecuted by the Sunni leadership under Saddam, some of who are now ringleaders in ISIS.
Perhaps it is even possible that Iran might actually be more concerned with collateral damage than the US is when the US deploys its cruise missiles and drones thousands of miles from its borders against foes the US citizenry cannot even distinguish from friends in the region.
The US will never be able to remove the beam from its own eye until it stops wielding sticks while shouting at others to stop wielding theirs.
29
This is probably the best news story to come out of the mid-east that favors the West. As long as the Sunni and ISIS are devoting their war making capability against their natural enemy the Shia and Iran, thier hatred of the West will subside, as they are preoccupied with destroying each other.
8
We need to be doing more in getting arms directly to the Kurds. We must not let such a regime as the Islamic Republic to fill in the power vacuum that we are leaving. We had the chance to liberate Syria to a mostly secular opposition but when we failed to do so, ISIS terrorists filled in the power vacuum and the regime in Iran got stronger instead of weaker. Inaction has consequences and we are unfortunately living with them due to our disengagement due to Obama's weakness.
2
You report this as if it were news? We know this.
Iran will control the northern Middle East with or without nukes. Probably with - because Obama and Kerry are clearly resigned to that eventuality. They just want a paper deal they can trumpet for PR purposes at home. (Yesterday the NYTimes ran a story suggesting a deal was near "except for verification." EXCEPT FOR VERIFICATION? That's the essence of any deal!)
Besides the Israelis, the folks losing sleep over this are the Sunni leaders of the southern countries. The lowest of the low, the Saudis startrd all this by allowing their children to be taught by extremists. In the end, Iran could control it all like Perdia once did. Kinda like history repeating itself. Leonidas
Iran will control the northern Middle East with or without nukes. Probably with - because Obama and Kerry are clearly resigned to that eventuality. They just want a paper deal they can trumpet for PR purposes at home. (Yesterday the NYTimes ran a story suggesting a deal was near "except for verification." EXCEPT FOR VERIFICATION? That's the essence of any deal!)
Besides the Israelis, the folks losing sleep over this are the Sunni leaders of the southern countries. The lowest of the low, the Saudis startrd all this by allowing their children to be taught by extremists. In the end, Iran could control it all like Perdia once did. Kinda like history repeating itself. Leonidas
4
Did anyone in the Middle East ask the US to step in, (besides Israel of course)? 100 years ago, before the Middle East was carved up by the West for oil and pride, was there a call for US intervention?
Iran is a threat? Let's see ... how many countries has Iran invaded, overthrown, bombed, threatened, controlled? I mean Iran, not this nation whose right wing is going even crazier yet, fomenting, foaming, and flipping out. Here is Iran, helping Iraq fight ISIS, paralleling our own efforts, and here we are, with our rightwing, flipping out.
Iran is a threat? Let's see ... how many countries has Iran invaded, overthrown, bombed, threatened, controlled? I mean Iran, not this nation whose right wing is going even crazier yet, fomenting, foaming, and flipping out. Here is Iran, helping Iraq fight ISIS, paralleling our own efforts, and here we are, with our rightwing, flipping out.
69
Do we really want to put "boots on the ground" in the middle of this mess? John McCain and his fellow hawks must be out of their minds.
44
Excellent! Let Iran carry the water for now. The sooner the Arab states settle their differences by themselves, the better for all of us.
And if we have a natural ally in that crazy mess, it may be Iran. They have an educated middle class, a long history of a proud civilization, and, in the final analysis, something more than sand to lose in war.
And if we have a natural ally in that crazy mess, it may be Iran. They have an educated middle class, a long history of a proud civilization, and, in the final analysis, something more than sand to lose in war.
103
"The sooner the Arab states settle their differences by themselves, the better for all of us."
Except that Iranians are not Arabs.
Except that Iranians are not Arabs.
5
I agree with you, but technically Iranians are not arabs
6
The regime occupying Iran is one that is driven by anti-Americanism. The Iranian people are an educated people with a proud history of a great civilization but unfortunately that civilization has been taken over by the Islamic Republic. The regime cares nothing for Persian civilization and culture. The regime in Iran will never be an ally of America until the Iranian people are able to get rid of the repressive regime terrorizing Iran and the world.
3
Relax! For once, let them in the Mid. East fight their own stupid fights! Don't waste American lives and money on this stupidity. America can always use it's might if needed. Just don't wasted it on tribal/religious conflicts that have no any threats to the USA.
14
this is great. finally the money to pay for that mess isn't coming from my tax money. best news I've gotten it eons.
27
To me, the choice is clear. It's between a Middle East dominated by Iran, or a Middle East dominated by folks who behead American hostages, massacre Christians, rape Yezidi girls, incinerate prisoners of war, bulldoze historical sites, and destroy museums.
111
When you put it that way, the Iranians don't look so bad after all.
10
In this highly convoluted cess pit of lies and distortions asserted by the members of the anti Persian coalition only one trend is clear: all roads lead eventually to war with Iran, even though Iran is the only committed enemy which ISIS actually has. But then the goal of the ten or twelve Neocons, who seized the Republic by invading the mind of George W Bush, causing him to run it into a ditch in Iraq, was always to get at Iran.
Iran will effectively accomplish what we have failed to do for the past 10years. We can go home now. Iran will restore order.
81
Could this be the beginnings of an allied war with Iran/Iraq on one side with SyriaAfghanistan/Pakistan on the other. Alliances of other nations form to your left.
2
Actually, syria would be (are) fighting against ISIS so they would be an "ally" of Iran/Iraq. I don' t know why afghanistan or Pakistan are in the pic.
3
Saudi Arabia had Nawaz Sharif and offered a deal he cannot refuse. There is a lot of opposition in Pakistan, but it would be done as Nawaz is the Saudi guy in Pakistan. Pakistan Army would not fight against Iran however could free the Saudis to send their and Pakistan Army would defend Saudi Arabia from foreign intrusion.
BTW if that is outsourced to Pakistan, what would we do?
BTW if that is outsourced to Pakistan, what would we do?
1
If ISIS does not reflect the real Islam, then why don't the Muslim countries fight them collectively? They certainly have the weaponry and manpower. The rest of the world might then listen to their rhetoric of ignorance and stop the blame game ( i.e., guilty by association).
16
When the Protestants and Catholics fought it out on the streets of Belfast and when IRA bombs went off in London in the 1970s, why didn't the Greek Orthodox, the Pope, Billy Graham, and Tennessee snake handlers all get together to form an army to stop the fighting? Because, like the Muslims, the Christians have never been a single bloc.
18
Muslim countries can't fight ISIS collectively because they are not a collective; rather they are a set of warring religious factions, tribes and ethnic groups.
4
Well, the people fighting ISIS are muslim....
6
The US is the largest exporter of arms in the world and our government has the gall to say "American officials fear the rockets and missiles could further inflame sectarian tensions and cause civilian casualties because they are not precision guided"???? Really? Are all of the millions of bullets and landmines, cluster bombs, and god knows what else that we sell, precision guided?
And really, I am not sure it is possible to inflame sectarian tensions more than we already have.
Unfricking-believable!
And really, I am not sure it is possible to inflame sectarian tensions more than we already have.
Unfricking-believable!
148
The quote you cite is best understood as American officials' concern about the market share of American war corporations. Don't get angry at them -- you know the saying, it's just business.
22
And if America had not meddled in the internal affairs of Iran and Iraq in the first place, none of this would be happening. Republicans may disagree and consider that remark both traitorous and wicked. NO they will say. It was not about greed and oil $, but about spreading the "American way of life."
2
Watching this unfold feels like I'm watching Vietnam in 1975 happen all over again.
It sickens me to think how our president threw in the towel and gave up Iraq to Iran, the very same enemy whose machinations were directly responsible for hundreds of American casualties. Democrats may try to convince themselves otherwise, but two wrongs didn't make a right. They may have made for a new Iranian empire stretching from the Indian Ocean to the Mediterranean, however.
It sickens me to think how our president threw in the towel and gave up Iraq to Iran, the very same enemy whose machinations were directly responsible for hundreds of American casualties. Democrats may try to convince themselves otherwise, but two wrongs didn't make a right. They may have made for a new Iranian empire stretching from the Indian Ocean to the Mediterranean, however.
10
Allow me to jog your memory - the real mistake was invading Iraq in the first place.
56
The Arabs need a strong entity to keep them from chaos. Thru wisdom and strength Iran is our choice. We must fake discomfort, a minor challenge.
6
And how did Vietnam turn out after '75- the long view? A growing economy, no expansionist action against its neighbors (except the ouster of the loathsome Kymer Rouge regime in Cambodia 30 years ago), emnity for China, and friendly and peaceful relations with the US. Is that what you were referring to? If only.our relations with Iran would turn out the same.
11
Yup, these Iranian rockets & missiles "are not precision guided" unlike ours. So they'll undoubtedly land on people, kill people (aka "collateral damage") attending weddings, funerals, sleeping in totally non-implicated habitats, and otherwise indiscriminately. Oh, and maybe they'll also kill US citizens and then circle back around some 2 weeks later and kill their minor children.
Alternatively, we could sell Iran some of our "precision guided" rockets & missiles of our own, with the subversive result that all those collaterally damages people -- well, their survivors anyway -- will come to hate Iran as vividly, unrelentingly, and justifiably, as they now do the US. Turn-around as fair play.
Alternatively, we could sell Iran some of our "precision guided" rockets & missiles of our own, with the subversive result that all those collaterally damages people -- well, their survivors anyway -- will come to hate Iran as vividly, unrelentingly, and justifiably, as they now do the US. Turn-around as fair play.
50
That is one of the funniest and most brilliant posts I've read in a long time. Bravo!
4
Thank you President Obama, to a thoughtful controlled approach as the latest war unfolds in the Middle East. The more rockets that Iran aims at ISIS, the less there are to aim at Israel. Let's continue talking. We go into the mess because we stopped talking and made stuff up. How horrible must the families of young Americans and Iraqis who were lost in this useless war feel, when we rushed into something the prior administration knew nothing about and lied to defend its actions. Steady as she goes, Mr. President. Keep thinking and talking. We have no business here.
63
If so, get out.
But are we getting out? No.
So much for this endorsement of Obama. If it's premise is applied, Obama is a fool. But what real american submits to the tyranny of sane policy? It ruins the entertainment value.
But are we getting out? No.
So much for this endorsement of Obama. If it's premise is applied, Obama is a fool. But what real american submits to the tyranny of sane policy? It ruins the entertainment value.
3
Israel do not need Iranian rockets to explode, it has Netanyahu, he already started the self destruct timer today, what a job he is. No Palestinian State= continual state of war = a one state solution.
Palestinian have a friend in Israel - Bibi.
Palestinian have a friend in Israel - Bibi.
6
Palestinians want a state and peace, Bibi doesn't them to have a State and want to continue his decades-long land-stealing status quo while peace would mean to define borders, so why are you claiming that Bibi is the Palestinians friend?
2
So I guess we presume to occupy the exclusive moral high ground in arming various factions in conflicts? ISIS makes Bush's "Axis of Evil" look like a Sunday school choir, so what's the problem with Iran pitching in to combat them? If I didn't know better, our interests & Iran's align in Iraq, i.e. stability. Yet all I read about is our military going out of its way to avoid working with, and generally slinging mud at, Iran. Its almost like they want to avoid cooperation with Iran at all costs. But why.
38
Because sunni Iraqui Arabs will not tolerate being a subjugate minority in a Shia Iranian Arab colony.
This stuff isn't secret, not in 1991 or 2001 or today.
This stuff isn't secret, not in 1991 or 2001 or today.
1
True enough, however, at this point ISIS is killing Shia and Sunni Arabs alike. And since no Sunni country is stepping up, Iran is helping its own, and for the time being, all others affected.
1
Though when the Sunni controlled Iraq, they didn't mind stomping on the rights of the Shia majority or Kurd minorities. Hence, the mess we are in today. Karma's a batch o' fun, ain't it?
2
From the article: "Iran has deployed advanced rockets and missiles to Iraq to help fight the Islamic State in Tikrit, a significant escalation of firepower and another sign of Iran’s growing influence in Iraq."
And this is a surprise? They have a dog in the fight, the Shia in Iraq, and live right next door. Their pit bull training treadmills have been visible on NSA satellite images for years. Now the betting begins: the U.S. German Shepherds vs. the Iranian pit bulls. One has reach and speed, the other, endurance and toughness. Will the judges accept bribe money? What do you think? Of course, they will. It's a pay-to-play environment.
9
Why can't we let them handle their own lifes?
14
Because then Washington will lose 90% of its grand-standing opportunities.
4
Let's get with practicality-so the arms came from Iran; the U.S.doesn't supply the Kurds. Someone has to take a stand for what is right and if it is the Iranians and they do it properly who are we to complain.
70
That is just the latest situation. History gives a much better picture - if anyone has any idea of history. In 1953 the US and Britain got rid of Iran's democratically elected President Mossadegh (bcoz he wanted Britain to pay for Iran's oil that Britain was extracting. Britain did not want to and so called on the US to help get rid of Mossadegh. The US obliged). The Shah was then installed in Iran. Oddly enough Iranians were not happy with that and out of all the disquiet rose the Ayatollahs and then there was the Iranian Revolution and then ..... all history and easily verified. And all so avoidable if the West would just butt out of the Middle East.
The US government just can't bear to watch another country waste money on military spending--what will US military contractors do? Every bullet, every rocket supplied by Iran is less money from US taxpayers, For shame!
80
First; we enabled Iran as Iraq's main ally when we invaded Iraq and kicked out the Sunnis, thus empowering the Shia. Iraq has now been part of greater Iran thanks to BushCo.
Second; It's now bad to fight ISIS?
We need to run all this by Iran's spokesperson in DC, Mr. Cotton and the GOP.
Second; It's now bad to fight ISIS?
We need to run all this by Iran's spokesperson in DC, Mr. Cotton and the GOP.
17
Maybe we should send the Iranian leaders another letter?
27
The US gave Iraq to Iran ten years ago, and Iran seems to be intent on keeping it. Life is messy for superpowers that do stupid things.
72
Iraq was an artificial construct by the Treaty of Versailles after WW1 and should split along ethno-religious lines--Kurds, Sunnis & Shia.
It's imminently clear from the ability of a mere 2,000 Isis to hold Mosul, a city of one million, that there is collaboration on a grand scale by the populace with their fellow Sunnis of Isis. The male population of Mosul could eject Isis in short order by sheer numbers alone, had they any desire to do so.
The operation to take Mosul by the Iraqi government (Shia militias) should be run along the lines of the Marines' battle for Faluja: all parties remaining in Mosul at the time of the assault are considered combatants and treated accordingly. Do not try to deny that even a moderately interested populace could eject from within 2,000 lightly armed irregulars should they so desire.
It's imminently clear from the ability of a mere 2,000 Isis to hold Mosul, a city of one million, that there is collaboration on a grand scale by the populace with their fellow Sunnis of Isis. The male population of Mosul could eject Isis in short order by sheer numbers alone, had they any desire to do so.
The operation to take Mosul by the Iraqi government (Shia militias) should be run along the lines of the Marines' battle for Faluja: all parties remaining in Mosul at the time of the assault are considered combatants and treated accordingly. Do not try to deny that even a moderately interested populace could eject from within 2,000 lightly armed irregulars should they so desire.
1
"but American officials fear the rockets and missiles could further inflame sectarian tensions and cause civilian casualties because they are not precision guided. Their deployment is another dilemma for the Obama administration as it trains ...."
American officials fear
American officials fear
American officials fear
Ladies and gentlemen, the Obama policyless foreign policy.
We are the good guys because while we watch events unfold, we not only watch, we fear. Iran does what it wants, we refuse to act, but, we do fear the results of our inaction and Iranian action. How noble we are to be so Unlike Bush jr. You know, it is all his fault anyway.
American officials fear
American officials fear
American officials fear
Ladies and gentlemen, the Obama policyless foreign policy.
We are the good guys because while we watch events unfold, we not only watch, we fear. Iran does what it wants, we refuse to act, but, we do fear the results of our inaction and Iranian action. How noble we are to be so Unlike Bush jr. You know, it is all his fault anyway.
8
Yes. It is.
11
We've heavily sanctioned Iraq. That's action, not fear.
If you want war with Iran, give your hero Bush/Cheney a call, they'd love to help you out. But remember, it won't be their kids dying for the MIC.
If you want war with Iran, give your hero Bush/Cheney a call, they'd love to help you out. But remember, it won't be their kids dying for the MIC.
13
Apparently Obama ran for president in the alternate reality where there was no war on false pretenses so the aftermath is not Obama's problem.
What a sweet emotional high. American narcissism uber alles.
What a sweet emotional high. American narcissism uber alles.
1