ISIS Takes Control of Mosul

#1,801
#1,801
lawgator1 said:
Do you think it possible that significant US boots on the ground is exactly what ISIS wants? I do. One, it gives them legitimacy. Two, it feeds the religious war they want to have. Three, it pits us against other ME countries all over again.

I really do not agree that it is inevitable. The 2016 election will be a lot about that issue, and other than RP the GOP candidate is pretty much committed to more war in Iraq, which the electorate by and large opposes.
Click to expand...

I didn't say I agreed with that rationale, but you and I both know that's where this path leads and that's regardless of political party.

And the answer, which I stated several months ago, is the fact that Iran is waiting in the winds for us to abandon everything in that area and pull back. And then swoop in as a savior and defeat ISIS or at least stops their advances. Which ends in some possible scenarios:

1. The US influence in the region bottoms out.

2. Iran becomes the de facto power over Iraq or what's left of it.

3. Saudi Arabia and the other nations in the ME are forced to deal with Iran without our backing.

4. ISIS is possibly recognized as a de facto nation state with the areas they have conquered and given legitimate recognition. Not very likely, but Iran would face the same problem we have in fighting an insurgency so they could present this kind of plan as a counter to all out war against ISIS. They use their influence over Assad to get him to agree to those terms and he keeps what remains of his territory.

These are some crazy Tom Clancy guesses of mine, but I bet someone in the government has gamed out this very same scenario. And no matter which way you cut it, we either meet ISIS head on or risk Iran making itself the regional power.
 
#1,802
#1,802
Grand Vol said:
I didn't say I agreed with that rationale, but you and I both know that's where this path leads and that's regardless of political party.

And the answer, which I stated several months ago, is the fact that Iran is waiting in the winds for us to abandon everything in that area and pull back. And then swoop in as a savior and defeat ISIS or at least stops their advances. Which ends in some possible scenarios:

1. The US influence in the region bottoms out.

2. Iran becomes the de facto power over Iraq or what's left of it.

3. Saudi Arabia and the other nations in the ME are forced to deal with Iran without our backing.

4. ISIS is possibly recognized as a de facto nation state with the areas they have conquered and given legitimate recognition. Not very likely, but Iran would face the same problem we have in fighting an insurgency so they could present this kind of plan as a counter to all out war against ISIS. They use their influence over Assad to get him to agree to those terms and he keeps what remains of his territory.

These are some crazy Tom Clancy guesses of mine, but I bet someone in the government has gamed out this very same scenario. And no matter which way you cut it, we either meet ISIS head on or risk Iran making itself the regional power.
Click to expand...


Sounds like another way of saying that we have to risk our soldiers to try to keep the ME from sorting itself out in a way we don't like.

So what happens when we defeat ISIS? Then what? We leave and another group rises.

I really think we have to cut our losses at this point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#1,803
#1,803
Grand Vol said:
If that's the case, I'd rather they cut the country into three like we should have before. Kurdistan (screw any other nation that objects), a Sunni portion in the middle and a Shi'a in the south.

Just get it over with.
Click to expand...

I've long supported the idea of an independent Kurdistan but in reality that will never happen. Too many foreign obstacles are in front of that. The biggest being our NATO partner Turkey and second Iran would never allow it either.
 
#1,804
#1,804
lawgator1 said:
Sounds like another way of saying that we have to risk our soldiers to try to keep the ME from sorting itself out in a way we don't like.

So what happens when we defeat ISIS? Then what? We leave and another group rises.

I really think we have to cut our losses at this point.
Click to expand...

I'm just laying out a possible outcome. But at this point, I still stand by supporting the Kurds with whatever they want and if that includes boots on the ground as a deterrent or "red line" so to speak, I'm all for it.

You are correct we need to cut our losses at some point. But I also don't believe we should hang our friends out to dry when they have shown they can stand up to ISIS and beat them.

As for the remainder of Iraq, drop them like a bad habit.
 
#1,805
#1,805
Grand Vol said:
If that's the case, I'd rather they cut the country into three like we should have before. Kurdistan (screw any other nation that objects), a Sunni portion in the middle and a Shi'a in the south.

Just get it over with.
Click to expand...

IIRC, that is what Biden suggested we should do several years ago.
 
#1,810
#1,810
If we've developed any sort of expertise at counter-insurgency during our time in Iraq, this would be a good place to put it to use.

With brush fires in the Ukraine and possibly China, it seems like a good time to pick our fights carefully.
 
#1,814
#1,814
Why would Israel give nuclear weapons to Saudi Arabia?

Try to think about your conspiracy theories before you post them.
 
#1,815
#1,815
Pacer92 said:
Butt hurt is always strong with you. You attack or whine like a baby.
Click to expand...

Nah, I just find it comical that you would post up something so ignorant it defies logic.

You don't think if a nuclear weapon was used the entire world wouldn't know about it?
 
#1,816
#1,816
Velo Vol said:
Why would Israel give nuclear weapons to Saudi Arabia?

Try to think about your conspiracy theories before you post them.
Click to expand...

Do you guys ever have anything of substance to add or just totally dismiss everything as conspiracy because it's not CNN?
 
#1,817
#1,817
looks like in the video there was a fire before the big blast. seems to me something got "cooked" and went up big. also the target was a relatively lightly developed hill, seems if you are going to set off a nuclear weapon you choose a more densely packed area.
 
#1,819
#1,819
Pacer92 said:
Do you guys ever have anything of substance to add or just totally dismiss everything as conspiracy because it's not CNN?
Click to expand...

Oh, sure, since you mentioned it...

How about the complete lack of EMP? Surely you know about EMP and the fact it would have fried that camera as well as any electronics in that immediate area.

Or the fact that conventional explosions, when there is a sufficient amount of them, can cause mushroom clouds as well? Kind of like those idiots in the Ukraine that accused them of setting off a nuke a few months ago.

Or the lack of a thermal pulse. Missing that rather huge part of a nuclear blast.

Or how ignorant it sounds for the Saudis and Israelis to be colluding over such a strike. Doesn't that sound pretty dumb when you say it?

And the overall reason of why would Israel or Saudi want to nuke them anyway? If they had a nuclear weapon, wouldn't they use it on say a military base instead of outside of a city?

Head on back to Pravda and see what else they come up with.
 
#1,820
#1,820
Grand Vol said:
Oh, sure, since you mentioned it...

How about the complete lack of EMP? Surely you know about EMP and the fact it would have fried that camera as well as any electronics in that immediate area.

Or the fact that conventional explosions, when there is a sufficient amount of them, can cause mushroom clouds as well? Kind of like those idiots in the Ukraine that accused them of setting off a nuke a few months ago.

Or the lack of a thermal pulse. Missing that rather huge part of a nuclear blast.

Or how ignorant it sounds for the Saudis and Israelis to be colluding over such a strike. Doesn't that sound pretty dumb when you say it?

And the overall reason of why would Israel or Saudi want to nuke them anyway? If they had a nuclear weapon, wouldn't they use it on say a military base instead of outside of a city?

Head on back to Pravda and see what else they come up with.
Click to expand...

come on GV you know facts have no part in these conversations. only sensationalism and vagueness is allowed here.
 
#1,822
#1,822
Grand Vol said:
I don't recall any of the ones I've seen video on having a mushroom cloud.

You're probably far more versed in the effects than I am though.
Click to expand...

That was my point from the get go. I never claimed it a nuclear bomb, only posted the video and said it looked the part and asked for thoughts...

But, because of your distaste for anything other than CNN and immaturity in posting for likes, you do what you do...

Anyway, here's another view for those who'd like to actually discuss it..

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xRkZHcibvqw
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top