Penelope Posted June 13, 2014 Report Share Posted June 13, 2014 Yes, and said nothing is out of the question regarding the response. I see this morning Obama is looking to do something in Iraq - oh dear. Let's hope our government are not as stupid as the last lot and keep us out of this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIGHTCHOKE Posted June 13, 2014 Report Share Posted June 13, 2014 I see this morning Obama is looking to do something in Iraq - oh dear. Let's hope our government are not as stupid as the last lot and keep us out of this. He has B2 and B52 Bombers at Fairford in Gloucestershire at this very moment! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gimlet Posted June 13, 2014 Report Share Posted June 13, 2014 (edited) Iran has mobilised troops. Its a pity the west has decided against all available evidence that the House of Saud is our friend and Iran is our enemy. Al queda and Isis are sunni groups driven spiritually and financially from Saudi Arabia. Iran is Shia, young and other than tiny Oman, about the only stable country in the middle east. Iraq is split any way. the Kurdish Peshmerga control the north as an autonomous region. They will one day join with the kurds in Turkey and Iran to form a Kurdish nation. The arbitrary borders drawn up when Iraq was created in 1921 are crumbling and there is no point trying to preserve them. They were a colonial aberration then and there's no point reinforcing them now. The West is wasting time, money and lives trying to preserve an artificial country against the natural forces of the region. Make peace with Iran, offer diplomatic support only, and let them get on with it. Edited June 13, 2014 by Gimlet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penelope Posted June 13, 2014 Report Share Posted June 13, 2014 The same reason that there has been so much strife in Africa. Iran has mobilised troops. Its a pity the west has decided against all available evidence that the House of Saud is our friend and Iran is our enemy. Al queda and Isis are sunni groups driven spiritually and financially from Saudi Arabia. Iran is Shia, young and other than tiny Oman, about the only stable country in the middle east. Iraq is split any way. the Kurdish Peshmerga control the north as an autonomous region. They will one day join with the kurds in Turkey and Iran to form a Kurdish nation. The arbitrary borders drawn up when Iraq was created in 1921 are crumbling and there is no point trying to preserve them. They were a colonial aberration then and there's no point reinforcing them now. The West is wasting time, money and lives trying to preserve an artificial country against the natural forces of the region. Make peace with Iran, offer diplomatic support only, and let them get on with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overandunder2012 Posted June 13, 2014 Report Share Posted June 13, 2014 thank christ were heading for an election no party would be stupid enough to suggest going back it would ruin their chances in an election, america good luck its your baby now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ditchman Posted June 13, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 13, 2014 Here is a thought................ISIS are persona non grata with alqieda (however you spell it)...even the iranains are not happy with ISIS.....sooner or later some country is going to fund alqieda, and do some deal with them to stamp on ISIS a precedent has already been set "nought queerer than folk " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hamster Posted June 13, 2014 Report Share Posted June 13, 2014 Iran has mobilised troops. Its a pity the west has decided against all available evidence that the House of Saud is our friend and Iran is our enemy. Al queda and Isis are sunni groups driven spiritually and financially from Saudi Arabia. Iran is Shia, young and other than tiny Oman, about the only stable country in the middle east. Iraq is split any way. the Kurdish Peshmerga control the north as an autonomous region. They will one day join with the kurds in Turkey and Iran to form a Kurdish nation. The arbitrary borders drawn up when Iraq was created in 1921 are crumbling and there is no point trying to preserve them. They were a colonial aberration then and there's no point reinforcing them now. The West is wasting time, money and lives trying to preserve an artificial country against the natural forces of the region. Make peace with Iran, offer diplomatic support only, and let them get on with it. Largely on the money. There are subtle nuanaces between Kurds from different regions though, Iraq's are happy and willing to tear up their current alliances particularly since they happen to be in the richest areas themselves, a sizeable portion of Turkish Kurds are also openly hostile to their host country, Iranian Kurds are much less fervent in any desire to split from their country of birth though and remain largely proud of being both Kurd and Iranian. The Iranians mistrust of America and the West has some of its roots in their meddling and desire to form/force a new Kurdish state by grabbing land presumably from all three countries ! Historically such land grab and new nation formations have done nothing but lead to decades/centuries of misery and conflict. For what it's worth I believe the West knew perfectly well that the events now taking place in Iraq were inevitable but unfortunately one mans misery is anothers profit opportunity. I tell you the truth what you think you know and have been shown/told for the last few decades about much of that region and its people is almost entirely different to the reality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdubya Posted June 13, 2014 Report Share Posted June 13, 2014 (edited) Here is a thought................ISIS are persona non grata with alqieda (however you spell it)...even the iranains are not happy with ISIS.....sooner or later some country is going to fund alqieda, and do some deal with them to stamp on ISIS a precedent has already been set "nought queerer than folk " There is already a country funding AL-Qaeda Its called Saudi Arabia.the same country that IS supporting ISIS KW Edited June 13, 2014 by kdubya Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ditchman Posted June 13, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 13, 2014 proberly asda -bin-liners brother, they have a big construction company in saudia....and his daughter who is a pop star in one of the scandinavian countries......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reece Posted June 13, 2014 Report Share Posted June 13, 2014 Let's not forget that this isn't just about Iraq. ISIS is active in Syria and has attacked other Syrian rebels, even capturing a weapons dump once which apparently had American supplied weapons in it. The Syrian situation probably benefits ISIS in Iraq. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kes Posted June 13, 2014 Report Share Posted June 13, 2014 I just wonder how the people of Iraq find life worth living - the oil is the ransom target and it will force Obama to act. These people are all our enemies and already committing atrocities. I wouldnt want us to get drawn in but ......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KFC Posted June 14, 2014 Report Share Posted June 14, 2014 Slight detour of the thread but, given that our military is pretty much dependent on the U.S these days then I think it's just a case of Obummer saying jump and us asking how high? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dogrun Posted June 14, 2014 Report Share Posted June 14, 2014 Put tony blair out there in the middle of it,perhaps he might, just might understand what us parents went through while our sons and daughters was out there,Not his. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zapp Posted June 14, 2014 Report Share Posted June 14, 2014 Let's not forget that this isn't just about Iraq. ISIS is active in Syria and has attacked other Syrian rebels, even capturing a weapons dump once which apparently had American supplied weapons in it. The Syrian situation probably benefits ISIS in Iraq.ISIS originates from Al Qaeda in Iraq, who were ironically predominantly Syrian militants. The civil war in Syria has benefited them massively in terms of funding and recruitment, and so they are now filling the power vacuum left in Iraq after the US combat troops withdrawal. As I see it, the real danger now is that radical groups across the middle east and north and sub saharan Africa will be emboldened to rise against weakened and fragmented post Arab-spring governments. We and the US have a lot to answer for in this by destabilising the region through our intervention in Iraq in 2003. The challenge we now face is in building consensus with the stable regimes in the area capable of real power brokering, namely Iran and Israel. This is difficult enough without Russian gamesmanship, not to mention the much more subtle and insidious influence China is beginning to assert via interests in African and Arab mineral resources. Once again, the world pivots on the middle east. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ditchman Posted June 14, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 14, 2014 looking on the bright side for a change.....Iran ...you know the thorn in the side of USA and Israel.....since the new president has come to power has taken a stance inline with western thinking they do not want ISIS at any cost in their country.... im the first one to bang the drum and cast unfounded aspertions....but it seems Iran is getting its act together and could be a stable Islamic pillar in the region..........i may be talking out of my rear, but i think something good might come of this...which might be a lesson to the western powers to keep their nose outa other peoples buisness.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Psyxologos Posted June 15, 2014 Report Share Posted June 15, 2014 He has the stomach to deny he was to blame. Unbelievable... Article here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retromlc Posted June 15, 2014 Report Share Posted June 15, 2014 i think it was a waste of time,my only regret is the loss of life on both sides,every dead person is someone's child regardless of their beliefs.It has caused distrust between anyone who is bot a muslium towards Muslums.but when you hear dertain reports and statements they make who can blame you. As a no point of interest ,what would of happened if after the oil crisis in the '70's the west realised this was always going to be a problem...our thirst for oil. If at that time they had decided to through all resourses into reneuable energy,and I mean really decided it was the future.condidering the advancement in for example the mobile phone,if the same rate of development to renuables over the last 40 years i would think that we probably would not need oil, Our interest in the MiddleEast would be zero and there probably would be none of our present day problems. It would be interesting if someone ran a computor simulation on that to see how long ago oil would become a very small % of our energy needs,then factor that against our oil fed interest and motivation in the Middle East and see if this would not be an issue If that make sense??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gimlet Posted June 15, 2014 Report Share Posted June 15, 2014 (edited) He has the stomach to deny he was to blame. Unbelievable... Article here. In a sense he was more to blame than Bush who was presiding over a national emergency and was under immense pressure from a hawkish political and military establishment to be seen to be doing something. His back was to the wall, he was weak, poorly advised, out of his depth and he made a grave error. That's not to defend his actions, but it does explain them. Blair was in no such position. He had the benefit of detachment. He was not under political pressure and had the opportunity to act as a true statesman and a moderating influence, but instead of sounding the voice of reason he chose to concoct for whatever bizarre and unwholesome reasons an entirely fraudulent case for a random and meaningless war against a country which had no involvement with the crimes of Sept 11. I cannot believe this ******** has never been held to account, still less that he has been permitted to amass a vast personal fortune on the back of his poisonous political career; nor that he is of all abhorrent ironies a "peace" envoy - and to the middle east of all places - and that after perjuring himself in our Parliament he is still indulged by our press and our political establishment and by a Prime Minister who uses him as an unofficial consultant. If someone one day manages to assassinate Blair I shall be opening Champagne and punching the air. Edited June 15, 2014 by Gimlet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
margun Posted June 15, 2014 Report Share Posted June 15, 2014 He has the stomach to deny he was to blame. Unbelievable... Article here. What a disgraceful, insincere and stomach churning Man Teflon Tony really is. He deserves to swing from the gallows for the 'legacy' and burden he has left for the UK (and the wider world). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hamster Posted June 15, 2014 Report Share Posted June 15, 2014 In a sense he was more to blame than Bush who was presiding over a national emergency and was under immense pressure from a hawkish political and military establishment to be seen to be doing something. His back was to the wall, he was weak, poorly advised, out of his depth and he made a grave error. That's not to defend his actions, but it does explain them. Blair was in no such position. He had the benefit of detachment. He was not under political pressure and had the opportunity to act as a true statesman and a moderating influence, but instead of sounding the voice of reason he chose to concoct for whatever bizarre and unwholesome reasons an entirely fraudulent case for a random and meaningless war against a country which had no involvement with the crimes of Sept 11. I cannot believe this ******** has never been held to account, still less that he has been permitted to amass a vast personal fortune on the back of his poisonous political career; nor that he is of all abhorrent ironies a "peace" envoy - and to the middle east of all places - and that after perjuring himself in our Parliament he is still indulged by our press and our political establishment and by a Prime Minister who uses him as an unofficial consultant. If someone one day manages to assassinate Blair I shall be opening Champagne and punching the air. Yes it is true that America had to act but they too could have chosen the path of the righteous and covertly as well as openly targeted the real bad guys instead of invading two nations wholesale ! 911 was committed by terrorists, I have never understood what gave anyone the right to drop bombs on and annihilate/obliterate the infrastructure of an entire country because of it. You've only got to think about this for a minute to understand it had more to do with a desire for war than an absolute need for it. We now reap what Blair has sown. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petethegeek Posted June 15, 2014 Report Share Posted June 15, 2014 The challenge we now face is in building consensus with the stable regimes in the area capable of real power brokering, namely Iran and Israel. With the price sought by Iran being higher than that which Israel is prepared to tolerate? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malik Posted June 15, 2014 Report Share Posted June 15, 2014 ISIS originates from Al Qaeda in Iraq, who were ironically predominantly Syrian militants. The civil war in Syria has benefited them massively in terms of funding and recruitment, and so they are now filling the power vacuum left in Iraq after the US combat troops withdrawal. As I see it, the real danger now is that radical groups across the middle east and north and sub saharan Africa will be emboldened to rise against weakened and fragmented post Arab-spring governments. We and the US have a lot to answer for in this by destabilising the region through our intervention in Iraq in 2003. The challenge we now face is in building consensus with the stable regimes in the area capable of real power brokering, namely Iran and Israel. This is difficult enough without Russian gamesmanship, not to mention the much more subtle and insidious influence China is beginning to assert via interests in African and Arab mineral resources. Once again, the world pivots on the middle east. Very true, you've touched on a number of points. Many have also gained a vast amount of experience fighting in Syria and other conflicts in the region, which would have been far more valuable than anything they would of learnt in the classroom...! After the fall of Saddam, i was under the impression that the remains of the Iraq forces still there were dismantled. Jobless, maybe bitterness, with some standard of knowledge would easily have been absorbed into most terrorist links. The other main issue with the region is Sunny and Shia tensions. Iraq, like Syria and Lebanon. Both groups do not wish to be controlled by the other! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wymberley Posted June 16, 2014 Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 We've been interfering out there for 1000 years since The Crusades and nothing has changed. Well, apart from the oil, that is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kent Posted June 16, 2014 Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 We've been interfering out there for 1000 years since The Crusades and nothing has changed. Well, apart from the oil, that is. But we are the good guys, all this is nothing to do with oil! its WMD, and oppression LOL. I do wish the General population will wise up and tell the meddlers what we think at the ballot boxes. Take North Korea for reference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scolopax Posted June 16, 2014 Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/benedictbrogan/100276452/tony-blair-may-be-mad-but-hes-got-a-point/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.