Article

2014-01-06 Iraq

U.S. troops prevented from helping even as al Qaeda overruns Iraqi cities

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Besoeker 2014-01-06 04:21|| || Front Page|| [6 views ] Top

#1 Besoeker,

What side are US picking? Iran or Saudi in the middle east?

Posted by Voldemort Thranter2866 2014-01-06 09:08|| 2014-01-06 09:08|| Front Page Top

#2 Picking sides in an Islamic conflict is a fool's errand VT. Even if your side wins, you lose.

Posted by Besoeker 2014-01-06 09:20|| 2014-01-06 09:20|| Front Page Top

#3 Observing the current Russian and Syrian model [much like the Russian models of WWII and Stalingrad], is most interesting. Disrupting rebel jihadist LOC [lines of communication, re-supply] while concurrently permitting rebel occupations of key terrain, which can then be bombed into rubble. It may take several more years, but eventually the Syrians and Russians will run completely out of jihadists.

Posted by Besoeker 2014-01-06 09:31|| 2014-01-06 09:31|| Front Page Top

#4 To quote the Romans:

"Arabs are desirable neither as friends nor as enemies."

It is funny that the more things change the more they remain the same.

Posted by Frozen Al 2014-01-06 10:39|| 2014-01-06 10:39|| Front Page Top

#5 Iran or Saudi in the middle east?

At this point, neither.

Posted by Pappy 2014-01-06 11:17|| 2014-01-06 11:17|| Front Page Top

#6 They're not even picking us...

Posted by tu3031 2014-01-06 17:08|| 2014-01-06 17:08|| Front Page Top

#7 "What side is the US picking in the Middle East"? - Political-Legal Dialecticism + "safe" Politics or Geopol would say "both".

The Sunni Saudis historically like to stay in the shadows, so iff proposed future OWG "Islamic/
Middle East/ Persian Gulf Union", etal. ever needs a serious MilPol public ass-whuppin' before the International community, Shia Rising Iran is your Boy to do it.

Posted by JosephMendiola 2014-01-06 18:43|| 2014-01-06 18:43|| Front Page Top

#8 What has never been explained is the presence of more than 1,500 US and NATO troops at the huge air base north of Irbil in Iraqi Kurdistan. It is a sort of Kurdish security blanket, but it could be useful for other things.

Posted by Spigum Tojo8813 2014-01-06 19:02|| 2014-01-06 19:02|| Front Page Top

#9 My bad vibes vee "China-vs-Japan/PHIL/Everybody" in East Asia is NOT abated.

As for NOT-JAPAN = NOT-SYRIA/BABY ASSAD = IRAQ,

* TOPIX > [Washington Examiner] WHITE HOUSE: IRAQIS NEED TO HANDLE GROWING VIOLENCE THEMSELVES.

The Bammer's statement would be nominally alright or satisfactory on the surface save for the covert or ulterior OWG Globalist agenda.

Posted by JosephMendiola 2014-01-06 20:08|| 2014-01-06 20:08|| Front Page Top

21:21 Frank G
20:45 Ebbang Uluque6305
20:42 JosephMendiola
20:32 JosephMendiola
20:19 JosephMendiola
20:15 JosephMendiola
20:08 JosephMendiola
19:20 Besoeker
19:15 Shipman
19:14 Shipman
19:13 Shipman
19:11 Shipman
19:08 Shipman
19:04 Shipman
19:02 Spigum Tojo8813
18:58 AlanC
18:54 AlanC
18:51 Barbara
18:43 JosephMendiola
18:39 Deacon Blues
18:26 KBK
18:24 Skidmark
18:16 Skidmark
18:14 Airandee