Pentagon Reveals Details Of Iraq Military Offensive Involving Up To 25,000 Troops

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
I read somewhere that 4,000 U.S. were deploying to Kuwait immediately with tanks and such. Maybe they're going to advise Iraqi forces.

Found it...

They are likely there to protect Kuwait the same as the US troops send to Jordan.

What no ones wants is ISIS spreading beyond Syria/Libya/Iraq.

a reply to: intrptr

I know tanks aren't advisors. That was sarcasm


a reply to: crazyewok
Mmhmm. Right. Guess time will tell.

IMO boots/tanks on the ground in this fight is a huge mistake. The neocons win again.

a reply to: ~Lucidity

Oh, that wasn't directed at you, I forgot to add, thanks for bringing the info. Best evidence I seen yet for further US ground operations in the ME.

a reply to: intrptr

I know. It's cool.

originally posted by: ~Lucidity


Mmhmm. Right. Guess time will tell.

IMO boots/tanks on the ground in this fight is a huge mistake. The neocons win again.

You have any more info on what battalion are there?

You can get a feel on what they are doing from what types of battalions are deployed there.

If they are just 4000 troops from bog standard army units its likely nothing and you wont expect them to operate in small army of 4000.


If its 4000 SF and specialized support units then id be suspicious.
Unless they cross in to Iraq I would not call them boots on the ground yet.

Kuwait has a few US bases there already I believe so this is likely just strengthening them.

a reply to: crazyewok

Just this.

I don't think they're the only ones either.

And I know for a FACT special forces are all over the place. Just can't say where because they can't tell us.

a reply to: crazyewok

They are likely there to protect Kuwait the same as the US troops send to Jordan.

What no ones wants is ISIS spreading beyond Syria/Libya/Iraq.

Yes, another "shield" in the desert…

Desert Storm

You know as well as I that US troops bordering Syria in Iraq, Jordan and Turkey are there for but one reason… to facilitate the invasion of Syria.

"Assad must go…" hasn't changed. The threat of the lauded (I)maginary (S)tate is just another in a long line of US excuses to invade another country.

a reply to: ScientificRailgun

^this exactly! Too many people want their cake and eat it too

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
I wonder, sometimes. When the U.S. sits back and does essentially nothing about the ISIS threat in the middle east, they are accused of supplying and aiding the terrorists.

When the U.S. suggests going in and taking the threat head on, they are labelled warmongers/child killers/usurpers/etc.

So, which is it? It can't be both.

Maybe that's because it should be nothing. We've caused enough damage there.

At some point, the Middle East has to stand up and deal with this. No one else is going to or can do it for them.

Turkey, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Israel, all nations with more than enough military firepower, need to handle it.

The only reason we are even there is because we're proxies for two of them.

a reply to: ~Lucidity

Oh don't get me wrong, I don't agree with sending ground troops into Iraq/Syria/wherever to fight ISIS head on. I also believe this is something the middle east should deal with. I was only pointing out the hypocrisy of the "U.S. is everything evil" posters in their assessment of the ISIS situation.

a reply to: ScientificRailgun

I should have started by saying, I agree about the hypocrisy and here's why

It's definitely a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation, and probably of our own making, but that doesn't mean we should keep making the same mistake over and over. That's lunacy in any universe. But unfortunately, it seems like we're getting sucked in...again.

a reply to: ~Lucidity

Well nobody can deny that when the U.S. pulled out of Iraq, despite there being a semi-stable government in Baghdad, the departure of soldiers created a power vacuum in areas, particularly rural areas that were vulnerable to violent subjugation. Couple that with the fact that many in positions of power in the military were sympathetic to extremist ideologies and you have a formula for a terror group to basically roll in, grab weapons and armor, and seize wide swaths of territory.

In a way, the U.S. is at fault for that. But more importantly, the Iraqi military also bears some of the blame for giving in so easily to what was initially a small group, and allowing it to balloon out to what we see today.

a reply to: ScientificRailgun

Yes. It was foretold and foretold and foretold, even before we went in to Iraq.

That's part of the reason why this is so frustratingly horrific to think we will go back in. For any reason.

The neocons will get their way...one way or another. They're like a rabid dog about this. And probably for good reason as loss of control over the Middle East will sink them and the U.S. economy. That would also be horrible but probably not as horrible as constant war and death and destruction.

I'm going off the deep end here, but I'm starting to believe this is an Israeli-Saudi alliance with ISIS and the U.S. as their pawn.

a reply to: BornAgainAlien


here's the very secret dealings behind the counter offensive... to at least secure all the remaining territory which is mainly under the control of the Shia dominated Iraq government in eastern Iraq...

the Iranian clout is backing/supporting this USA-Iraq venture to combat the Jihadist-Extremist Sunni death Caliphate/ISIS-IS





keep in mind that the Fort Carson Combat Troops building a permanent base in Kuwait will remain there as a safe place to resupply the Shia military forces of the remaining lands which were once Iraq... a buffer zone is thus created from a boots-on-the-ground middle east presence of USA troops and the very close Sunni-Radical-Jihadists of IS-Isil.... with IRan as a deep secret ally with the USA which itself is moderately led by MB policies, behind the scenes mostly

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
a reply to: crazyewok

Just this.

I don't think they're the only ones either.

And I know for a FACT special forces are all over the place. Just can't say where because they can't tell us.

Yeah......ok reading up whats at fort Carson doesn't seem promising .

Here what wiki says is there:
Fort Carson is the home of the 4th Infantry Division, the 10th Special Forces Group, the 440th Civil Affairs Battalion (USAR), the 71st Ordnance Group (EOD), the 4th Engineer Battalion, the 1st Battalion, 25th Aviation Regiment, the 759th Military Police Battalion, the 10th Combat Support Hospital, the 43rd Sustainment Brigade, the Army Field Support Battalion-Fort Carson, the 423rd Transportation Company (USAR) and the 13th Air Support Operations Squadron of the United States Air Force. The post also hosts units of the Army Reserve, Navy Reserve and the Colorado Army National Guard.

Thats a pretty nasty bunch.

Those are the sorts of names Id expect in a possible offensive role.


If any more US troops with composition like this are sent to the ME id worry.

a reply to: crazyewok

Worry because it's happening.

I will not rant...I will not rant...

a reply to: crazyewok

Here`s about the stockpiling of lots of weapons...

U.S. Stockpiling Fighting Vehicles Near Iraq Ahead of Anti-ISIS Offensive

Since June, the U.S. military has been slowly stockpiling massive amounts of its gear coming out of Afghanistan at a depot in Kuwait adjacent to a bustling commercial port, in preparation for ultimately shipping it across the border into Iraq for an allied offensive against the Islamic State group.

The facility's warehouses and large asphalt yards now are home to roughly 3,100 vehicles, most of them MRAPs – the mine-resistant, ambush-protected vehicles that have been ubiquitous in America’s prolonged wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. There is also some electronic equipment and other supplies at the depot, located at Kuwait's Shuaiba port, defense officials say.

Source

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

Yeah because we didn't already leave enough equipment and weapons there, in Iraq, where they got almost literally handed over to ISIS.