US and British forces should leave Iraq immediately - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the nations of the Middle East.

Moderator: PoFo Middle-East Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please. This is an international political discussion forum moderated in English, so please post in English only. Thank you.
#15058391
The Iraq Parliament voted something like 500 to 0 for us to leave. I can't seem to find the figures. There seems to be a concerted cross media attempt to hide the result as it was so embarrassing. I again commend Trump for his elimination of Soleimani, a man responsible for the loss of numerous American and British soldiers lives. As Democrats and anti fascists we should unquestionably accept the vote of the Iraqi Parliament. Its their country not ours. As people of dignity we have no need to stay where we are not welcome. And as a most basic duty to the men and women of our armed forces, who risk their lives for us, we should not leave out troops in a Muslim country where most of the people sympathise with an open enemy.
#15058407
It was 170-0, and it should be noted that there are 328 members of parliament. Those 170 members who voted are almost universally representatives from Shi’a dominated areas. Now ask yourself why the Kurdish and Sunni representatives largely didn’t even show up for the vote. A government representing the will of the people indeed. You’re literally backing the fascists......it would be ironic if it weren’t so old and tired.
#15058438
I agree we should leave. And cut off all military aid to Iraq. And impose crippling sanctions on them the instant they side with Iran.
#15058454


We don't have to worry about a further escalation of the conflict. Iranian Foreign Minister Javid Zarif issued a statement via Twitter saying Iran does not seek an escalation of war, hours after they attacked an Iraqi air base that housed US military personnel.

Are they mocking Trump? It seems to many that Trump declared he didn't want to fight a war right after killing someone else's national hero, and what apparently just happened looks like an exact copy.


Iran's retaliation would be limited to minor missile attacks against American military bases in Iraq or Syria, which is proportionate to the threat posed by the United States. The sense of proportionality is a must when your country launches a retaliatory strike against another country.
Last edited by ThirdTerm on 08 Jan 2020 05:53, edited 1 time in total.
#15058455
ThirdTerm wrote:https://twitter.com/JZarif/status/1214736614217469953

We don't have to worry about a further escalation of the conflict. Iranian Foreign Minister Javid Zarif issued a statement via Twitter saying Iran does not seek an escalation of war, hours after they attacked an Iraqi air base that housed US military personnel.
Are they mocking Trump? It seems to many that Trump declared he didn't want to fight a war right after killing someone else's national hero, and what apparently just happened looks like an exact copy.
#15058478
The Iranians have shown who is the adult in the room, and that isn't Trump.

The US will be kicked out off Iraq and Syria anyways. Better for them to leave voluntarily now than to suffer a major humilitation.

syr74 wrote:It was 170-0, and it should be noted that there are 328 members of parliament. Those 170 members who voted are almost universally representatives from Shi’a dominated areas. Now ask yourself why the Kurdish and Sunni representatives largely didn’t even show up for the vote. A government representing the will of the people indeed. You’re literally backing the fascists......it would be ironic if it weren’t so old and tired.


There is now nothing to hold Iraq together. I'm happy for the Kurds to finally get their independent state. But dividing up a country is always a dangerous game that has geopolitical consequences. On the plus side, an independent Kurdistan will piss off Erdogan in a big way.

This is the consequence of the US's illegal war in Iraq. The US/UK are solely to blame. Once the Yanks are gone, the Shia militias will be the only effective fighting forces in the country. The Shias and Kurds will divide the country among themselves and the Sunnis will get screwed. That's what happens when all you can do in life is terrorism.
#15058480
So Iran has responded by open acts of war. I hope Donald Trump is man enough to respond. I hope Donald Trump is man enough, brave enough to fight back. Only a moderate, proportionate response is required here. Iran attacked American bases, bases that are there at the request of the democratically elected government of Iraq. They attacked 2 bases with 15 missiles. I would suggest therefore that we respond by say attacking 20 military installations inside Iran with 150 missiles / bombs. I say we because I hope that Boris Johnson is man enough and brave enough to take part in the response to this totally unjustified aggression by the fascist government of Iran, on our American ally.

Why was the aggression unjustified? Because Soleimani was a fascist, illegally organising attacks against us in in Iraq. Soleimani wanted the Americans to leave. That doesn't make him a fascist. He would have been perfectly entitled to try and persuade Iraq's parliament to ask western forces to leave. But he didn't. He used fascist methods rather than democratic methods.

This is why we should put a withdrawal plan from Iraq into immediate effect. If we do not withdraw when asked by an overwhelming majority of the Iraq parliament, then we will have become just like the fascists we went into Iraq to fight. Leaving Iraq would not weaken our ability to strike back at Iran's military. No indeed, moving our ground forces out of harms way from Iraq will free us to repsond without fear for our troops.
#15058491
This thread has major chud energy.

Atlantis wrote:This is the consequence of the US's illegal war in Iraq. The US/UK are solely to blame. Once the Yanks are gone, the Shia militias will be the only effective fighting forces in the country. The Shias and Kurds will divide the country among themselves and the Sunnis will get screwed. That's what happens when all you can do in life is terrorism.

There is a special circle of Hell reserved for Tony Blair and George W Bush. They invaded Iraq without even attempting to understand the the Sunni/Shi'a divide, and assumed (like the utter simpletons they are) that it would become irrelevant once Iraq was converted into a shining beacon of liberal democracy. There's no arguing with that level of stupidity. :lol:

Drlee wrote:I agree we should leave. And cut off all military aid to Iraq. And impose crippling sanctions on them the instant they side with Iran.

ok boomer
#15058496
Heisenberg wrote:This thread has major chud energy.


There is a special circle of Hell reserved for Tony Blair and George W Bush. They invaded Iraq without even attempting to understand the the Sunni/Shi'a divide, and assumed (like the utter simpletons they are) that it would become irrelevant once Iraq was converted into a shining beacon of liberal democracy. There's no arguing with that level of stupidity.


ok boomer
I don't know why but I always think Dick Cheney is probably more guilty than either Blair or Bush.
#15058497
Patrickov wrote:I don't know why but I always think Dick Cheney is probably more guilty than either Blair or Bush.

Meh, throw them all in the great lake of fire.

I went to a conference a couple of years ago for work and for some reason Cheney was the keynote speaker, alongside Leon Panetta. They spent the whole hour salivating over the prospect of a war with Iran. Sickeningly evil men.
#15058521
Heisenberg wrote:There is a special circle of Hell reserved for Tony Blair and George W Bush. They invaded Iraq without even attempting to understand the the Sunni/Shi'a divide, and assumed (like the utter simpletons they are) that it would become irrelevant once Iraq was converted into a shining beacon of liberal democracy. There's no arguing with that level of stupidity.


The tragedy is that the war hawks haven't learned a thing from 20 years of failed US/UK interventions in the ME. Millions dead, tens of millions displaced, cities flattened ... yet the war hawks keep on playing their stupid games. Russia, Iran and China are expanding their influence because of failed US interventions.

The pretexts for the Iraq invasion were utterly miserable, but today, the US narrative is even less believable. We expect them to be vicious, but that degree of stupidity is beyond belief. Following the invasion, Iraq quickly descended into chaos because the Americans didn't think they had to administer the country after removing the Baath party administration. They honestly thought Americans would be welcomed with open arms and everybody would live in peace singing in praise of America forever. They believed their own propaganda.

With Trump that stupidity has come to the surface. It's no longer hidden beneath a benevolent lie. The true nature of imperialism is exposed for all the world to see.
#15058540
Atlantis wrote:The Iranians have shown who is the adult in the room, and that isn't Trump.
Most of the people presently holding power within the Iranian government are hardly the cooler heads in any scenario, certainly not here....they're scared. More accurately they are most likely terrified, and with good reason. That drone strike didn't just kill two senior Iranian military officials, it sent a message to Iran that could not be missed as this escalates. That being that the United States government can kill who they want, when they want within that region short of people going completely off-grid. The merits of using the bully pulpit in that fashion are certainly up for debate, that what is occurring is the byproduct of cooler heads prevailing in Iran really isn't. They're scared.

The US will be kicked out off Iraq and Syria anyways. Better for them to leave voluntarily now than to suffer a major humiliation.
There is a real likelihood that, should a Democrat win the White House in 2020, U.S. forces will leave those areas. At this stage, again for better or worse, there isn't a foreign force on Earth that can seriously hope to compel the United States to pull forces from a region by force. Even Vietnam and the 'loss' of that war was best described as a lack of will on behalf of the U.S. government and the American people rather than an actual defeat. So yes, the possibility that the U.S. will give up on occupation in those areas is very real, but then that is what it is best described as. There isn't a great deal of fortitude to see things through within many portions of the United States over the last fifty years or so.

There is now nothing to hold Iraq together. I'm happy for the Kurds to finally get their independent state. But dividing up a country is always a dangerous game that has geopolitical consequences. On the plus side, an independent Kurdistan will piss off Erdogan in a big way.
As long as the legacy of Sykes-Picot is with us that region is almost certain to remain a quagmire no matter what any outside force does. The Kurds need their own state, the Turks need to be reigned in with regard to both the Kurds and their Armenian neighbors, the Shi'a and Sunni population should have separate Arab states with Iran remaining an independent Persian state, the Palestinian issue needs to be resolved and not simply by redrawing Israeli borders in a fashion that is wholly impractical (Arab states will need to give a little here too, particularly Jordan), and both the United States and Russia need to tread more lightly within the region. And that is just a primer.

This is the consequence of the US's illegal war in Iraq. The US/UK are solely to blame. Once the Yanks are gone, the Shia militias will be the only effective fighting forces in the country. The Shias and Kurds will divide the country among themselves and the Sunnis will get screwed. That's what happens when all you can do in life is terrorism.
I think the war definitely slanted the board, but it seems that all we're doing is tilting the odds in favor of which group gets to abuse the other. Because, sans the Kurds who really seem to want to just have their own digs and to be left alone, the majority of Shi'a and Sunni in the region only seem to object to oppression when they are the oppressed rather than the oppressor or at least tolerate that behavior from others within their community. If the U.S. was going to invade Iraq then they should have divided the country into three states splitting the land between the Sunni, the Shi'a and the Kurds. I firmly believe that the U.S. government was aware of this but feared 1: pissing off Erdogan (like that's a bad thing) and 2: that Iran would simply coopt Shi'a Iraq for itself which is a very real fear. Even if that occurred, imo, it would still be better than what that region is evolving into now.
#15058541
@syr74

Welcome. What a good first post. I agree with your careful assessment.

You will be a valued member of the board.

If the U.S. was going to invade Iraq then they should have divided the country into three states splitting the land between the Sunni, the Shi'a and the Kurds. I firmly believe that the U.S. government was aware of this but feared 1: pissing off Erdogan (like that's a bad thing) and 2: that Iran would simply coopt Shi'a Iraq for itself which is a very real fear. Even if that occurred, imo, it would still be better than what that region is evolving into now.


This is true. Saving that they could have left the Baathists in charge. Taking them out of positions of responsibility was a mistake of the first order.
#15058546
syr74 wrote:Most of the people presently holding power within the Iranian government are hardly the cooler heads in any scenario, certainly not here....they're scared. More accurately they are most likely terrified, and with good reason. That drone strike didn't just kill two senior Iranian military officials, it sent a message to Iran that could not be missed as this escalates. That being that the United States government can kill who they want, when they want within that region short of people going completely off-grid. The merits of using the bully pulpit in that fashion are certainly up for debate, that what is occurring is the byproduct of cooler heads prevailing in Iran really isn't. They're scared.


In contrast to US decisions under Trump, the Iranians show remarkable cool-headedness and moderation in everything they do. The US could have killed Soleimani for years but no US leader was crazy enough to actually do such a stupid thing. The Qudz force is as operational now as it was before. Soleimani's assassination has remarkably strengthened the Iranian's hand. Trump is exposed. He arbitrarily acts without plan and without allies just to satisfy his childish and narcissistic impulses. The US has always had the ability to kill anyone it wants - including you and me. To actually go down that road means that the US has become a rogue power, an outlaw among the nations. Soleimani already fought against Saddam's invasion, which was supported by the US. He like millions of Iranians weren't afraid to die then. They are not afraid now. The Yanks are afraid because they are fighting an illegal war on foreign territory far away from home for which there is no justification.

Bullies have to bully because they are weak. The Iranians know it, Kim knows, Putin knows it, the Chinese know it. The whole world knows that Trump is a coward.
#15058555
In contrast to US decisions under Trump, the Iranians show remarkable cool-headedness and moderation in everything they do.


Leaving Trump's decision to assassinate someone in a very public way, the fact is that the Iranians have no choice but to keep a cool head and practice moderation. The consequences for their going off half cocked is regime change. Three facts determine their response.

First. They cannot withstand a US effort at regime change. They cannot do it militarily and they cannot do it in their current domestic political environment.

Second. They have no cover. Not even Russia could help them against the US. It has no expeditionary forces with which to do it if Putin wanted to. And he is not going to fall on his sword over an international pariah.

Third. The Iranian military is no certain force. It may or may not allow itself to be cut to pieces to protect a regime that has its people starving in the streets against an enemy that can feed them overnight. They will do the calculus and decide whether it is better to starve under the current regime or depose the theocracy, save their own asses and bring the country back into the family of nations. The fact is that for the average Iranian, they would be better off loosing and some if not a great many of them know it.

But I admit that the optics are good at this point. Iran is looking responsible. At least to the people who do not believe that they destroyed the airliner. They almost certainly did, you know.

To actually go down that road means that the US has become a rogue power, an outlaw among the nations.


:lol:

Funny. I don't see the sympathy cards flowing in for the guy we offed. He was a really bad actor and the whole world knows it. He is not the point. It is the obvious attempt by the Trump administration to stir up trouble at this particular time that has people riled. Read back through my posts. I have been predicting something like this for months.

Now Atlantis, we all know that you hate the US. You have shown that to us time and again. And that is OK. It is your prerogative. You can call us the great Satan if you want to but that changes nothing. For the time being, and it will not be that much longer, the US is the transcendent military power. Only China could 'just maybe' try to stop us and they have no skin in the game. But rest assured. Your silly comments about millions of Iranians "not afraid to die" means nothing. It is empty rhetoric. How they feel about their inevitable destruction should they vex the US overmuch is not relevant. I have never seen a corpse worried about how it got so cold.
#15058562
Rich wrote:The Iraq Parliament voted something like 500 to 0 for us to leave. I can't seem to find the figures. There seems to be a concerted cross media attempt to hide the result as it was so embarrassing. I again commend Trump for his elimination of Soleimani, a man responsible for the loss of numerous American and British soldiers lives. As Democrats and anti fascists we should unquestionably accept the vote of the Iraqi Parliament. Its their country not ours. As people of dignity we have no need to stay where we are not welcome. And as a most basic duty to the men and women of our armed forces, who risk their lives for us, we should not leave out troops in a Muslim country where most of the people sympathise with an open enemy.

We are not staying there for Iraq. We still have unfinished business with Iran. It is about preventing Iran from getting a nuclear weapon and stopping them from terrorizing the Middle East.
#15058568
Hindsite wrote:We are not staying there for Iraq. We still have unfinished business with Iran. It is about preventing Iran from getting a nuclear weapon and stopping them from terrorizing the Middle East.


Don't lie. I mean, hindsight really is 20/20 and all, but looking at your multitudinous posts in the past would leave a person believing that you want American troops to die triggering some bullshit End-Times scenario, with ''Gog and Magog'' as Russia and an alliance of Islamic states against Israel, because you read it in Hal Lindsey's ''Late Great Planet Earth'' 50 years ago :excited:
#15058587
Latest sports news:

Brazil 1 San Marino 1

This is a brilliant result for Brazil's manager. Brazil scored the first first goal and the fact that San Marino managed to squeeze in an equaliser is really irrelevant. Its pathetic the way San Marino fanbois are trying to take comfort from this result. This result cements Brazil's reputation as the worlds number 1 football team. Every shred of credibility that San Marino had as a serious international football team have been lost. Really for San Marino the dream is over period. Why don't they just hang their boots up now?

This result is particularly satisfying because there had been some absurd suggestions from the usual dark malevolent corner suspects of the internet that Brazil's manager wasn't actually working for Brazil, but was actually working from the inside to help another national team. Well this result has put paid to that drivel. With this result Brazil's manager has restored Brazil's position as the unchallenged dominant number 1 team in the world. Truly he has made Brazil Football Great Again.
#15058598
Drlee wrote:Three facts determine their response.

First. They cannot withstand a US effort at regime change. They cannot do it militarily and they cannot do it in their current domestic political environment.

Second. They have no cover. Not even Russia could help them against the US. It has no expeditionary forces with which to do it if Putin wanted to. And he is not going to fall on his sword over an international pariah.

Third. The Iranian military is no certain force. It may or may not allow itself to be cut to pieces to protect a regime that has its people starving in the streets against an enemy that can feed them overnight.


First: the US cannot do regime change. After 20 years of failed interventionism that should be blindingly obvious. The US will be booted out off the ME. Any aggression like the assassination of Soleimani unites the Iranian people behind the regime in Tehran.

Second: Iran has all the backing (cover) it needs from Russia and China without becoming a Russian or Chinese vassal. They get Russian air defense systems and trade with China. Both China and Russia will defend Iran in the UN security council.

Third: The Iranian military and the revolutionary guards are insurmountable forces. They have shown what they are capable of in the Iraq-Iran war. Saddam had air superiority and American backing. The Iranians were prepared to make tremendous sacrifices to defend their country under their current regime.

@Drlee, all of this is purely hypothetical because the US hasn't got the stamina for a ground offensive of Iran. The Iranians can go on gradually increasing their influence in the region by a needle-prick policy, while Trump is huffing and puffing in Washington. I don't hate Americans, I hate the imperialists, and I'm certainly not alone in this. The Iranians have a liking for colorful language which I can understand in its context, but don't necessarily share. That's why I would never use terms like "the great Satan".
#15058602
First: the US cannot do regime change. After 20 years of failed interventionism that should be blindingly obvious. The US will be booted out off the ME. Any aggression like the assassination of Soleimani unites the Iranian people behind the regime in Tehran.


The US could destroy Iran in a month.

Second: Iran has all the backing (cover) it needs from Russia and China without becoming a Russian or Chinese vassal. They get Russian air defense systems and trade with China. Both China and Russia will defend Iran in the UN security council.


They have no time to do that. The gloves are already off. At the end of the day both Russia and China will realize that Iran is simply not worth the money they would lose in trade with the US. And that Iran is dangerous to everyone. I seriously doubt that China or Russia see Iran as anything other than a useful dupe to keep the US focused elsewhere.

Third: The Iranian military and the revolutionary guards are insurmountable forces.


:lol:


@Drlee, all of this is purely hypothetical because the US hasn't got the stamina for a ground offensive of Iran.



We most certainly do. We proved that by staying engaged in the region for decades. Besides. We can essentially destroy Iran as a functioning nation without a single boot on the ground.

I see you have used the term "imperialist". Do try to find out what that means before you use it inappropriately. There's a good chap.

Unfortunately, the above quote does not explain w[…]

Qutb was horrified by the extreme materialism an[…]

Your sentences are a non-starter. You don't have […]

Blast in Beirut, Lebanon

Where are evidence of any Israeli involvment? :eh: