Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Recent attacks in Iraq

Latest news tweets saying ISIL are advancing toward Baghdad, & embassies are preparing for evacuation.

So are the numbers of active fighters a massive underestimation? The BBC burble has put their combat forces at about 5000. Surely the Shi'a milita and those sections of the Iraqi army that still see something worth fighting for (elite divisions?) should be more than enough? Something seems a bit odd, here. For all that the state is weak and despised, can it really be overthrown by a 'handful' of loons(?) with no popular support from anything other than the minority population of the country? Also, are they intending to conquer Baghdad 'conventionally'? or has resistance collapsed to the degree that they just need to walk in? I don't really get how they can prevail against anything resembling organised resistance and numerical superiority??

I'm probably being hopelessly naive and uneducated in the ways of asymmetric warfare, mind, but am I missing something?
 
god damn sunnis extremists. 99.99999% of terrorism is committed by this lot. they won't stop till they murdered every single shia infidel alive.
 
The British political argument goes all weird.

Former foreign minister Lord Malloch Brown urged Blair to "stay quiet" because his presence in the debate was driving people to oppose what might be the necessary response.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jun/15/boris-johnson-unhinged-tony-blair


Boris Johnson said:
I have come to the conclusion that Tony Blair has finally gone mad. He wrote an essay on his website on Sunday (reproduced in the Telegraph) that struck me as unhinged in its refusal to face facts. In discussing the disaster of modern Iraq he made assertions that are so jaw-droppingly and breathtakingly at variance with reality that he surely needs professional psychiatric help.
...
The reality is that before the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, there was no al‑Qaeda presence in that country, none at all. Saddam was a ruthless Ba’athist tyrant who treated his population with appalling brutality. But he did not have anything to do with the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Centre, and he did not possess Weapons of Mass Destruction.
...
Somebody needs to get on to Tony Blair and tell him to put a sock in it – or at least to accept the reality of the disaster he helped to engender.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...as-a-tragic-error-and-hes-mad-to-deny-it.html

True, Boris is,mainly, merely distancing himself from his own vote for the invasion. But still...
 
Latest news tweets saying ISIL are advancing toward Baghdad, & embassies are preparing for evacuation.
Saigon-hubert-van-es.jpg
 
The British political argument goes all weird.
True, Boris is,mainly, merely distancing himself from his own vote for the invasion. But still...
i think another aspect of this is that much as the tories would like to have a go at bombing Iraq, the fact that TB is calling for it makes it harder for them to do so.

I know its old news but i still cant get over the fact that TB is Middle East Peace Envoy. God only knows what a peaceful solution to this situation is, but its up to the fucking peace envoy to try and find one
 
I know its old news but i still cant get over the fact that TB is Middle East Peace Envoy. God only knows what a peaceful solution to this situation is, but its up to the fucking peace envoy to try and find one

Tony thinks that the only way to bring lasting peace to the Middle East is by killing absolutely everybody who lives there. I reckon.
 
The whole point of ISIS is that there is no separate Iraq and Syria (and in the bits they control there rally isn't). The Islamic state covering both having been proclaimed now actually exists.

And to answer the question of who funded ISIS, well Saudi Arabia, but they've got some rather effective self-starters as well.
 
The whole point of ISIS is that there is no separate Iraq and Syria (and in the bits they control there rally isn't). The Islamic state covering both having been proclaimed now actually exists.

And to answer the question of who funded ISIS, well Saudi Arabia, but they've got some rather effective self-starters as well.

That's well premature that they have established an Islamic state. They control a lot of land that doesn't have many people in and cities that would not defend a status quo which was not in their interest. It's hard to imagine they will not be driven out again by the combined force of the Iraqi Army, the Iranians, Americans and Kurds. It doesn't look like a popular uprising of the people. It's control by a significantly external militia.
 
That's well premature that they have established an Islamic state. They control a lot of land that doesn't have many people in and cities that would not defend a status quo which was not in their interest. It's hard to imagine they will not be driven out again by the combined force of the Iraqi Army, the Iranians, Americans and Kurds. It doesn't look like a popular uprising of the people. It's control by a significantly external militia.
and you say this based on ... what?
 
That's well premature that they have established an Islamic state. They control a lot of land that doesn't have many people in and cities that would not defend a status quo which was not in their interest. It's hard to imagine they will not be driven out again by the combined force of the Iraqi Army, the Iranians, Americans and Kurds. It doesn't look like a popular uprising of the people. It's control by a significantly external militia.
I wasn't suggesting they have formed an effective really existing state, rather that they have proclaimed its existence - in contradistinction to the normal jihadi approach of saying that they're working towards establishing a future islamic 'state'. And this is one reason for much of the support its currently receiving, but more importantly for the discussion about syria/iraq, that they explicitly do not see the conflicts as separate - so to see them as fleeing syria into Iraq is to misunderstand what they're up to.
 
and you say this based on ... what?

Well do you think it looks like a general uprising? It doesn't to me, though I couldn't argue the case greatly as I'm not there, but the reluctance of anyone to fight for Maliki isn't the same as revolt.

Without it being a revolution as such it's not embedded. That's in the end a few thousand martyrs to fight the combined might of all those against them.

I'm not saying there won't be great suffering and bloodshed, but I can't see their rule enduring. It's an adventure, which may get played out repeatedly.
 
Well do you think it looks like a general uprising? It doesn't to me, though I couldn't argue the case greatly as I'm not there, but the reluctance of anyone to fight for Maliki isn't the same as revolt.

Without it being a revolution as such it's not embedded. That's in the end a few thousand martyrs to fight the combined might of all those against them.

I'm not saying there won't be great suffering and bloodshed, but I can't see their rule enduring. It's an adventure, which may get played out repeatedly.
I met a traveller from an antique land
Who said: "Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. Near them on the sand,
Half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown
And wrinkled lip and sneer of cold command
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them and the heart that fed.
And on the pedestal these words appear:
`My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings:
Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!'
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare,
The lone and level sands stretch far away".
 
I met a traveller from an antique land
Who said: "Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. Near them on the sand,
Half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown
And wrinkled lip and sneer of cold command
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them and the heart that fed.
And on the pedestal these words appear:
`My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings:
Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!'
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare,
The lone and level sands stretch far away".

Jean Jacques Burnel said that. He borrowed it from Pete Shelley.
 
Its a sunni milita on a rampage shortly to be followed by a shia milita rampage backed by kurds,yanks,iranians with air support:mad:
Dont expect a lot of isis prisoners getting to gitmo or anyway when I say isis fighter I mean any sunni who is t fast enough to run away:(
 
I know its old news but i still cant get over the fact that TB is Middle East Peace Envoy. God only knows what a peaceful solution to this situation is, but its up to the fucking peace envoy to try and find one
he came to Burma last year to give a 25 minute lecture at the government-supported Myanmar Peace Centre on how to do peace. Fuck knows how much he made from that.

I'm also told that in separate conversations he weighed in on the Buddhist - Muslim conflict with bizarre recommendations on policing madrassas, failing to understand that the core problem is Buddhist nationalism.
 
We should send him to the gaza strip:D
Although hamas being evil terrorists they'd send him back:hmm:
Face they'd get nothing if they took him hostage:D
 
So, what proof is there of the massacre of 1700 iraqi soldiers?

All the media is full of shouty "execution" headlines, followed by smallprint which says, "appears to show," "unconfirmed," seems to depict".

What the fuck is going on?
 
Back
Top Bottom