Did Trump just accidentally end our forever war in Iraq?

a reply to: F2d5thCavv2

america first.....deutchland uber alles.... wats the difference??????

a reply to: ressiv

Iranq in this case.

Cheers

a reply to: F2d5thCavv2

no.... usa already betreyad the koerds in syria ...lolllll

a reply to: F2d5thCavv2

thanks to trump and pompeo...XD

a reply to: ressiv

Iran ... Iraq ... they might as well unite ... only one letter different in their names after all ...

Cheers

a reply to: Oblique9043

Thats laughable considering it was their security forces who stood by and did nothing while it happened...even letting them into the greenzone armed in the first place. Its the responsibility of the host nation to protect embassies in their country...Iraq failed so we picked it up and got things sorted. Not to mention we had comms intercept on Iran's dudes all over and knew they had more planned even before the general got dunked a la hellfire. I would suspect our targeting is directly a result of what we hear them planning and who is planning it. So either Iraq was complicit or were never up to the job of mediating anything anyway.

a reply to: F2d5thCavv2

guess they just did….perhaps an new name great mesopthemia

originally posted by: Stupidsecrets
To the liberal eye, leaving and staying are both horrible. The only scenario where it's not horrible is if a Democrat President decides then they approve that is the correct decision.

Dear God please tell me you're being sarcastic...

*shudder*

a reply to: RickyD

yep thats wat they told us…. just as they did before the gulfwar...maken us crazy with """"PROOF"""" of WMD sigh...
once an lie Always an lie….

a reply to: dashen

Getting expelled from Iraq to get in to further escalations with Iran sounds like a real improvement "eye roll" so much for getting out of the middle east and endless wars. Oh well got to do something with our immense military budget amirite?

a reply to: ressiv

Yes for years we have been getting our service members to lie about finding Iranian militias supplying our enemies and teaching them how to better attack us...and for years we have been making up all the attacks by proxy that have been attributed to them. Thats tons of work man...and a whole lot of people...smart people...who we've tricked I guess.

originally posted by: RexKramerPRT
Won the battle but lost the war.

The 1400 year war between the Shiites and Sunnis? They can keep it...lol

15 years and how many lives lost..all for nothing..nice

This is what happens when you let a child make a knee jerk reaction. It was inevitable at some point..leaving on your own terms would of been far better.

Most of you cheerleaders can't see beyond your back yard, or 5 minutes ahead.

a reply to: vonclod

What exactly did you want? More lives lost, more money spent for nothing?

We were only there because our puppet ruler, Saddam Hussein, attacked Kuwait for slant drilling into his oil fields (after he spent years protecting them from Iran for us and bankrupted his country in the process), got himself sanctioned by the UN, and then tried to break his petro-dollar promise to us. It had nothing to do with WMDs (they had some, because we supplied them; they're in Syria now), nothing to do with 911, and nothing to do with helping the Iraqi people escape a dictatorship. We were there for two reasons: ensure Iragi oil wasn't sold for Euros, and try to get our noses back into Iran's business to do the same with Iranian oil.

OK, three: be a barrier to the Russian/Iranian/Syrian pipeline.

We had no business being there in the first place. Trump should never have gone in... oh, wait, that was Bush! Trump should have gotten us out instead of ramping it up, though... oh, wait, that was Obama. Never mind... I'm sure Donald Trump did something wrong...

TheRedneck

a reply to: Xtrozero

The 1400 year war between the Shiites and Sunnis?

And that is the top and bottom of it all.
Everything else is just smoke in mirrors.

Its at the heart of everything that goes on in Iraq and Syria at present.
Its at the heart of the enmity between Iran and Saudi Arabia and most other Sunni nations.

It doesn't matter what the US/UK/NATO/EU/UN or anyone else does, until they want to stop killing each other over a 1400 year old argument nothing much will ever change.

They can keep it...lol

Indeed.
I am now very much in the 'let them bloody get on with it' camp.

a reply to: ressiv

were not asking for a slice of Poland's neck invading Belgium or asking for lebiesbram? meanwhile while every one has been reeing about dead terrorists and screaming at the sky saying its gonna be ww3 (hint it wont) trumps being doing more things that are actually good for america like this thehill.com... GE_goIvNwarQz3KeYml79A8s#.XhFWpG_M3eE.facebook

President Trump signed a bill Monday to help eliminate the number of rape kits that need testing and are currently stalled in a backlog. The legislation will provide funding from the Department of Justice to help local governments get through the backlog of untested rape kits. Currently, there are more than 100,000 untested rape kits across the U.S., according to ABC News. The White House said the Debbie Smith Reauthorization Act of 2019 will ensure that “criminals are brought to justice,” according to a statement from press secretary Stephanie Grisham. “We know that DNA is much more likely than fingerprints to result in the identification of a criminal, yet thousands of rape kits currently sit untested in labs and on police storage shelves across the Nation,” Grisham’s statement read. The legislation will provide $151 million to the Debbie Smith DNA Backlog Grant Program, $12.5 million for DNA training and education programs, and $30 million for the Sexual Assault Forensic Exam Grant Program, ABC News reported.

so keeping this bit of legislation going again and keeping it funded is well a good thing all sides should be able to agree on for a change


and if this does get us out of iraq more power to him so if iraq asks us to leave i wont be to upset wanted that one done and the boys and girls home since about 2007

throw in hezbolla saying hey lets just target us forces and bringing them home the sooner the better would be my opinion on that www.axios.com... so whacking that terrorist scum wont even seem to be effecting our allies least as far as Hezbolla is concerned as its sure as hell a lot harder for them to get here vs our many foreign bases

a reply to: Freeborn

nailed it exactly! there has been a soft cold war going on sunni v shia that has been going on forever and heats up periodically its one of the reasons the Egyptians and the saudis entered into a military alliance with frigging Israel of all people and part of the point of what is going on in yemen (proxy war vs saudi and iran )

www.inquirer.com... and as the one major attack to take place after he hit the general was done by sunni not shia that is the only escalation im paying attention to but we had kind of been screwing with them for a while in somallia

originally posted by: dashen
a reply to: Wardaddy454

Ah, the good ol days.
Remember when they gave him a Nobel Peace Prize?

They should rename it the affirmative action prize.

a reply to: TheRedneck
Leaving on your own terms would of been far better.

I'm not putting Iraq in general on Trump, like you said, his predecessors own that. I know you may disagree, but assassinating the general was not a smart move, it was a knee jerk move..that is of course, my opinion. And I'm not saying he was a good man.

Nice explanation of Iraq, I did enjoy reading one of your posts explaining what the root of some problems are regarding Irans intense dislike of the U.S. due to things put in play in 1953(I'm aware of it, many do not seem to be), not sure what Carter had to do with that though.

a reply to: vonclod

Leaving on your own terms would of been far better.

Well, I can't argue with that... but it did seem like "our own terms" was looking like "the day after forever." To a degree, I'm looking at this in the light of wanting us to have never gone.

1953, if memory serves, was when Reza Shah was put in power in Iran. That was, yes, the beginning of the trouble, but the roots go all the way back to the turn of the century. US interests took over control of most of the oil in the Middle East. When Iran elected a Parliamentary government, that government had as one of its goals the nationalization of Iranian oil, which would have placed all Iranian facilities under Iranian control. The people liked that idea; the US interests didn't. So we put someone friendly to our interests into place: Reza Shah.

Reza was a bit of a tyrant himself, but his son, Mohammad Reza Shah, was a brutal dictator. The Iranians hated him, and that's where Carter came in. When Mohammad Reza Shah was ousted in a revolution, he fled to the USA. Iran demanded him back; they wanted their pound of flesh (and were quite excited at the prospect of ripping it from his bones while he was still alive). Carter said no, and allowed the Shah to go into hiding, so a group of Iranians took control of our embassy in retaliation and to demand a trade: hostages for the Shah.

It was a total of 444 days until Ronald Reagan was elected before the 52 hostages were freed. Mohammad Reza Shah was never given to Iran... he probably lived his life in a nice retreat somewhere.

So yeah, it started in 1953, but then again it goes even farther back to the beginning of oil in Iran. Carter, however, was the trigger that caused the ire between the US and Iran today. He didn't start it, but he damn sure cranked up the heat. He was also the one who put Saddam Hussein in power in Iraq; they were at war with Iran at the time, and the enemy of my enemy is my friend and all that.

I do hope one thing: if we do leave, we never go back without a direct threat to the US and a clear goal to accomplish and back our butts back out again. This is a religious war: Shi'ite vs. Sunni. We got no dog in that race. Let them fight it out amongst themselves.

TheRedneck