It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Iraq crisis: Isis militants close in on Baghdad - live coverage

page: 7
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 12 2014 @ 04:01 PM
I don't usually watch any cable news networks anymore but I just checked.They seem to be on their normal daily scheduled programs while barely mentioning Iraq.This is a rather alarming turn of geopolitical events to me! The last thing the middle east needs now is a government of this nature.Im very concerned about what the implications will be...for the world.

posted on Jun, 12 2014 @ 04:02 PM

originally posted by: BobAthome
a reply to: beezzer

Just curious , because u might know, without searching,, how likely any of the realed 5 , might be heading this? totally a thought, not a fact. but might be nice too find out.

Probably none, in my humble opinion.

This has been in the mix for a while.

There's more than what we're seeing. Perhaps this was a reason why there was such urgency to attack in Syria. Though it would have only aided ISIS long-term.

posted on Jun, 12 2014 @ 04:03 PM
a reply to: BobAthome

They'd need to stop, consolidate and build strength before even joking about Jordan or Kuwait unless they have VERY tight allies in the region that haven't spoken up yet. I can't imagine it for those extremes. Jordan would bring U.S. and quite possibly, Israeli forces directly into a fight that wouldn't end until the group was wiped out to the last person, IMO. There is the red line for full regional war. Just put Amman at risk.

Kuwait? Well... These are Sunni fanatics of the Wahhabi flavor. That makes the spiritual brothers to a % of Saudi's population who, by extension kinda smile upon Kuwait as the little one next to Goliath. Why attack what they have so much in common with?

Their prize lay East and West in my opinion. Ultimately two prizes for this Islamic state concept. Tehran and Damascus. The end of the Shia Faith as a political power in the region and possibly, forever. That is what I think the final end game is for what we're watching pursued.

The final moves in a war that started before even Washington was a gleam in his father's eye.

posted on Jun, 12 2014 @ 04:04 PM
a reply to: Soloprotocol

Well Brussels just bought the American Debt,,so E.U is out,,besides the E.U played there cards on Ukraine.
Russia,, just sold a lot of American dept, to pay for Olypics, so there out,

China,,or Syria,, dont think,,hmmm

posted on Jun, 12 2014 @ 04:08 PM

originally posted by: neo96

Those are not the only players in the ME.

Saudi's GIP...


Al-Muchabarat al-'Amma is the full Name of the Saudi GIP. That's what I said.

posted on Jun, 12 2014 @ 04:09 PM

a reply to: Wrabbit2000 if they head towards Kuwait City or threaten Jordan,,then yes lon

Thats a given:

In a July 2005 letter to Ayman al-Zawahiri, al-Zarqawi outlined a four-stage plan to expand the Iraq War, which included expelling U.S. forces from Iraq, establishing an Islamic authority (caliphate), spreading the conflict to Iraq's secular neighbors, and engaging in the Arab–Israeli conflict.[70] The affiliated groups were linked to regional attacks outside Iraq consistent with their stated plan, such as the Sharm al-Sheikh bombings (2005) in Egypt which killed some 88 people, including many foreign tourists.
edit on 12-6-2014 by neo96 because: (no reason given)

A.O. of ISIS:

ISIS 'territory'
edit on 12-6-2014 by neo96 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 12 2014 @ 04:10 PM
Even if we would have stayed in Iraq for 100 years, this still would have happened. I can't believe we didn't think this was going to happen when we went into Iraq in the first place. It makes me wonder...

If we knew us leaving would lead to a militant take-over, why did we leave all those weapons and money behind? Perhaps to make Iran itchy? If we have an itchy Iran (and I hear they're putting troops on the boarder and some are joining in too) -- that makes for a plausible reason to attack Iran.

Just some random speculation.

posted on Jun, 12 2014 @ 04:12 PM
It may be that the West wants a credible enemy to fight in the Middle East
It’s clear that some chicanery is and has gone on in the Pakistan theater of war in Afghanistan, where it is exposed in the book The Wrong Enemy ( that lo and behold Pakistan, our supposed ally, has armed, and gives comfort to the Taliban. If not for the ISI there would have been no Taliban in the first or second place.

posted on Jun, 12 2014 @ 04:13 PM
a reply to: Wrabbit2000

If they take Tehran,, that means a King even though Syrian,, will have started the new Caliphate,,he's still a King,,but so is the King from Jordan.

posted on Jun, 12 2014 @ 04:27 PM

How The US Is Arming Both Sides Of The Iraqi Conflict

posted on Jun, 12 2014 @ 04:28 PM
I heard a rumor that they have weapons of mass destruction.

posted on Jun, 12 2014 @ 04:30 PM
a reply to: deadeyedick

u do realize the greatest weapon of mass destruction,,,,is a thought/idea right?

posted on Jun, 12 2014 @ 04:31 PM

originally posted by: deadeyedick
I heard a rumor that they have weapons of mass destruction.

Probably true, and they got them from Syria.

posted on Jun, 12 2014 @ 04:39 PM
Someone might want to contact

and tell them ,,there is a new dress code,,
for the Human Resources Dept,,,
u know for the jobs that are listed.

wow lol

ps i think there 18 kilometers away,,,,

now convert to miles.


posted on Jun, 12 2014 @ 04:39 PM

originally posted by: BobAthome

originally posted by: amazing
A couple of issues, yeah?

Is the leadership that bad in Iraq that after 10 years of training and arming they can't fight? That's impossible! Remember that before we started WAR with Iraq that they had a very impressive army. They did. We didn't completely destroy it and then we trained and armed it for 10 years or so! What's really going on?

2nd issue, is the real boundaries of countries and lands before western colonialism and imperialism. We should let them go back to that and not force the imperial ones that we set up with seeming random lines that only benefited us. That's a huge issue.

3rd. We still have some HUGE airstrike and bombing capabilities there. We also have advisers on scene. It's not a lost cause by any means. Only if the Iraqi's want it to be a lost cause.

"boundaries of countries and lands before western colonialism and imperialism."

here u go then,,i guess the West just gives everything away, including Spain?
boundaries of countries and lands before western colonialism and imperialism.,,lol

I think you miss the point. What right do we have to make up country borders for lands that have no business ruling. There's a long history of that kind of stuff. we call it imperialism and it's not a good thing.

posted on Jun, 12 2014 @ 04:41 PM
a reply to: amazing

"What right do we have" i quoted u , if i am correct,,whom then does??
if not people?

posted on Jun, 12 2014 @ 04:44 PM
a reply to: amazing

I think you miss the point. W

Yeah someone has missed the point:

Maybe this video will clear it up.

posted on Jun, 12 2014 @ 05:32 PM
"ISIS Threatens to Invade Jordan, 'Slaughter' King Abdullah"
by Khaled Abu Toameh
June 12, 2014 at 5:00 am

guess i was wrong,,

quote " The recent victories in Iraq and Syria by the terrorists of ISIS -- said to be an offshoot of al-Qaeda -- have emboldened the group and its followers throughout the Middle East. Now the terrorists are planning to move their jihad not only to Jordan, but also to the Gaza Strip, Sinai and Lebanon.

Failure to act will result in the establishment in the Middle East of a dangerous extremist Islamic empire that will pose a threat to American and Western interests.

"The danger is getting closer to our bedrooms." — Oraib al-Rantawi, Jordanian political analyst"

ok so now Jordan is involved,, along with Turkey.

posted on Jun, 12 2014 @ 05:34 PM
a reply to: MystikMushroom

Obama was destined to be the bad guy on this one. There never was an exit strategy that didn't leave Iraq open to a takeover by either Shiites or Sunni extremists. Neither outcome is good for the Iraqi people. A fate worse than Saddam and sons?

Had to happen on Obama's watch.... Had to happen sooner or later. You can only contain hell for so long once the gates have been opened.

posted on Jun, 12 2014 @ 05:39 PM
a reply to: Stormdancer777

The irony, how Iraq has gotten forgotten during Obamas two term, I guess is time for another profiteer war to become the responsibility of the next Republican president.

Bush "Created the war on terrorism" while fattening the pockets of the war profiteers, now Obama Osama is arming the terrorist while welcoming them into Iraq.

Makes sense the US interest works wonders when it comes to creating and complicating conflicts.

But is ok, because our local base here in the south is expanding as we speak with new jobs to be created on warfare equipment maintenance that will be expected to last until 2035, now makes sense

edit on 12-6-2014 by marg6043 because: (no reason given)

new topics

top topics

<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in