Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
June 10, 2014

A Syrian War Spillover: ISIS Attacks Mosul

While the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) is fighting other Islamists in Syria's east it has gained enough resources to also launch capable attacks in Iraq. In January it captured Fallujah, a conservative Sunni city. Last week it attacked Samara and threatened to capture the Shia shrine of Imam Al-Hassan Al-Askari. The Iraqi army reinforced there. But that attack on Samara seems to have been a diversion.

Today ISIS set out to capture Mosul, Iraq's second biggest city. The government troops there were, allegedly, told to not resist or deserted and fled. ISIS took over prisons and police stations and released some 3,000 of the prisoners - many of whom will now join its ranks. It robbed banks and replenished its already large financial resources. It captured tons of new weapons, ammunition and trucks. The civilian airport is in its hands. Civilians are fleeing the city.

Prime Minister Maliki, with a yet unstable coalition after he won a recent election, has little capabilities to fight back. The Iraqi army alone is unlikely to be able to take on ISIS and the Sunni Anbar tribes that support it. The Iraqi air force is too small to make a difference. Maliki will have to resort to sectarian Shia militia and will have to arrange a new coalition with the Kurds. ISIS has helped him there as it recently attacked political offices of President Talabani, one of the two major Kurd leaders.

Iraq will need further support to push ISIS back. We may soon see some rather weird coalitions growing against it: Iraqi Kurds allied with Shia Iraqi Arabs and the more secular Iraqi Sunni tribes; the U.S. air force riding shotgun for the Iraqi military in coordination with special forces from the Iranian Revolutionary Guard.

Without its bases in east Syria ISIS would be incapable to achieve such gains. This spillover of the Syrian conflict should be an alarm signal even Washington can not deny. The Syrian government troops will be needed to tear ISIS down. The U.S. must now turn away from the insurgents in Syria and support the Syrian government troops in their fight against the common enemy. Unless that happens the ISIS problem will only fester and threaten more states in the Middle East including Jordan and Turkey.

Posted by b on June 10, 2014 at 9:38 UTC | Permalink


Obama told the cadets in his recent speech that the leadership of Al-Qaeda was decimated, the truth is Al-Qaeda hold territory that spans the borders of Iraq and Syria, and which includes large portions of both countries albeit sparsely populated desert.
Al-Qaeda's territory is already a de facto Islamist state, The possible loss of Mosul to them would mean one of Iraq’s richest and most important cities would be falling into the Al-Qaeda orbit, Unless the ordinary people in both Iraq and Syria confront these fanatics [not easy] but we know most Iraqis and Syrians reject them, Maliki has made a start by arming the more secular tribes [like the US did, even a broken clock is right twice a day] unless this is done, they can be assured of not a return to the middle ages , but to the stone age.

Posted by: harry law | Jun 10 2014 10:16 utc | 1

If anything, US is helping ISIS, and not just in Syria - Iraq is in Iran's sphere too. Therefore US is more than glad to show what happens to "disobedient regimes". So unless Maliki makes significant concessions to US, you can expect US to keep covertly supporting ISIS (at the very least by green-lighting Saudis to do that) while openly denouncing them and offering to sell weapons.

Posted by: Harry | Jun 10 2014 11:26 utc | 2

Oh, and US helping Syria to fight ISIS is from 100% fiction department, same terror will happen in Iraq unless they get the hint.

Posted by: Harry | Jun 10 2014 11:30 utc | 3

Surely the time has come to stop talking about armies fighting Fundamentalist Islamic Terrorist, and taking the long view of history. What we are witnessing is the renaissance of historic Arab Caliphate i.e. a transnational Arab state. Nation state being a foreign Western concept imposed on the colonized Arabs.

Posted by: TomV | Jun 10 2014 11:32 utc | 4

What the US and its murderous allies cannot accomplish in Syria they are now trying to achieve in tortured Iraq.

Arnold Lockshin, political exile from the US living in Moscow

Posted by: Arnold Lockshin | Jun 10 2014 11:40 utc | 5

ISIS destabilizing Syria and its neighborhood has been the US plan all along. They are happy about Mosul.

Posted by: hilmi hakim | Jun 10 2014 12:25 utc | 6

"The U.S. must now turn away from the insurgents in Syria and support the Syrian government troops in their fight against the common enemy"

Why would the US do that? They won't. A
s hilmi @ #5 suggests
ISIS destabilizing Syria and the neighbourhood is the agenda
Reshaping the ME- Is the agenda
The US is not going to turn away from their mercs. They have continually upped the stakes....The move into Iraq will give the US more justification for increasing intervention in more nations

Posted by: Penny | Jun 10 2014 13:03 utc | 7

Tom V @4 "What we are witnessing is the renaissance of historic Arab Caliphate i.e. a transnational Arab state". That may or may not be a good thing, one thing is for sure the Arabs will have to want the Caliphate, if the Arab League is anything to go by, not so much, they can't even agree on the color of their curtains. For better or worse the Nation state is here for the foreseeable future, in my opinion the Sharia law Caliphate is not what the majority of Arabs want, Sunni or Shia, the recent Syrian elections prove that.What is proving disastrous is the forced implementation of Islamism at the point of a sword.

Posted by: harry law | Jun 10 2014 13:39 utc | 8

Hi B, I think it's very important, indeed ESSENTIAL, that you understand what Harry, Hilmi and Penny are saying. "Al Ciada" is doing exactly what the US wants them to do. The US will destabilize Iraq for 1) being in Iran's sphere and 2) helping Syria in its war (Iraqi militias helped) and 3) having the temerity to demand US troops leave. The US would love to expand this technique to Russia where it would love to destabilize Russia's large Muslim minority.

The mercs will have to be defeated the hard way as in Syria and eventually the mother ship (Saudi Arabia) will have to be dealt with.

Posted by: Lysander | Jun 10 2014 13:43 utc | 9

If the spilling of the war in Syria was not expected, it means two things: either the USA had planned it or its foreign policy was made by stupid, cynical or incompetent people. I opt for the second.

Now we are witnessing a new Afghanistan been built up. This time it is more dangerous for the USA as it threaten the USA worshipped ally: Israel

Are we going to see the NATO and US troops leaving Afghanistan and moving to north Iraq in another attempt of occupation?
Starting this 'freedom and democratic' revolution in Syria was a criminal act and the West bears all the responsibility of all the 160,000 death.

Obama, Cameron, Sarkozy and Hollande, the emir of Qatar and the King of Saudi Arabia should be condemned as war criminals.

Posted by: Virgile | Jun 10 2014 14:03 utc | 10

what a stupid understanding of things on syria

moron you do realize the syrian rebels & islamists are fighting ISIS the most

Assad is simply not fighting ISIS other then small clashes once in a while

ISIS is also not fighting Assad

meanwhile its syrian rebels including nusra who fight ISIS the most

IF the US helps Syrian rebels to win or at least weaken Assad ISIS will be history

ISIS is only strong do to exploiting syria while rebels & assad fight

Posted by: stranger | Jun 10 2014 14:10 utc | 11

The Zionists must chortle at our helplessness in stopping this evil Yinon? plan to destabilize and divide their chosen enemies,when even the top levels of the American govt are lackeys and willing fools and tools in assistance.

Posted by: dahoit | Jun 10 2014 14:36 utc | 12


ISIS has been getting stronger in Iraq for the last 5 years. Any relation with Bashar al Assad?

Posted by: Virgile | Jun 10 2014 14:46 utc | 13

dahoit @11 'The Yinon plan' I agree the Zionists must be laughing, all being acted out now in real time.

Posted by: harry law | Jun 10 2014 14:51 utc | 14

Isn't it strange that these freedom fighter NEVER attack any of the US backed regimes in the region?

War by other means?

Posted by: Zico | Jun 10 2014 15:37 utc | 15

All Akhbar is reporting ISIS also took control of a university in Ramadi. Reports ISIS trying to establish supply line between Mosul and Ramadi.

Posted by: LLZ | Jun 10 2014 15:40 utc | 16

@15 That's one way to get a degree.

Posted by: dh | Jun 10 2014 15:43 utc | 17

Stranger has it right, first. Second, Syria's revolution started on the ground without any help from the US. Because, third, not everything revolves around the US.
True. Believe it or not.
Now, what the US does will be determined by the US's interests, which are pretty simple to flesh out:

1 - Make Assad as uncomfortable as possible because he's allied to Russia, and this puts pressure on them and therefore relieves pressure on Ukraine and the members of NATO in eastern Europe. The means by which this may be done are many. Which will be chosen only time will tell.
2 - Make Iran as uncomfortable as possible both because of Israel and because of Saudi Arabia, and because they've tried to do business with Russia as a way of relieving the pressure sanctions are placing on them. Same point as number one, really.

In short, the situation in Syria and now northern Iraq wasn't generated by any US actions (except indirectly by the invasion of Iraq by the drooling moron which weakened Iraq's ability to respond to ISIS), but by a revolution started inside Syria that has now had spillover effects elsewhere. But the US will take advantage of that situation, obviously, to advance its interests both there and elsewhere. Syrian rebels and the Kurds have been fighting ISIS, and Assad has kept his hands mostly off them because he's not stupid. He follows Napoleon's logic: don't interfere when your enemies are destroying each other.
Meantime, over here you guys sound like McCain, when you think you're being all leftist cool or something.
So, this is how it is in the real world. If you continue to want to live in a conspiracy-driven US-centric world, feel free. It will have only an accidental relationship to actual reality though.

Posted by: trefoil | Jun 10 2014 16:00 utc | 18

thanks b. i agree with the first 8 posters comments, especially lysander @8..

Posted by: james | Jun 10 2014 16:17 utc | 19

trefoil @17

" Second, Syria's revolution started on the ground without any help from the US"


"a revolution started inside Syria that has now had spillover effects elsewhere"

Also incorrect

ISIS did not 'spill over' to Syria- that is the NATO media narrative
ISIS came from Iraq and 'spilled' into Syria which is a bogus way of saying ISIS aka NATO backed mercs spread it's fighters into Syria

"ISIS originally knows as "Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS)"
now since it expanded into Syria called the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria...

"ISIS expanded into Syria in April last year"

Lets at least have our facts correct?

Posted by: Penny | Jun 10 2014 16:18 utc | 20


"Syria's revolution started on the ground without any help from the US"

Holy fuck. What a fucking embarrassment you are to cognitive organisms everywhere. It's is EXACTLY statements such as the one you shat out above that I and many here believe should be the ticket to the war criminals gallows for many in the US Establishment yet here you are mouthing the same war criminal narrative which clouds/negates the DOCUMENTED and myriad involvement of said US war criminals in Syria, post-War Iraq, Libya, Ukraine etc etc.

Really, you are apologizing and making excuses for cold-blooded murderers, you stupid fuck, and yet/worse you think you're being clever/sophisticated. Go suck a war criminal dick. Oh wait, you just did.

Posted by: JSorrentine | Jun 10 2014 16:20 utc | 21

@trefoil (17)

"In short, the situation in Syria and now northern Iraq wasn't generated by any US actions[...]"


Posted by: Luca K | Jun 10 2014 16:20 utc | 22


Iran is getting closer to the USA and to Turkey. Israel, worried about the Islamists soon at their doors are now in favor of keeping Bashar al Assad in power.
Saudi Arabia rulers who have encouraged extremists with the hope they will topple Al Maliki and Bashar al Assad now want to rein them as that feel threatened themselves.
The only ones who are encouraging Sunni extremism are Qatar and rich private donors in Saudi Arabia and Koweit.
As long as ISIS are fighting the enemies of the Syrian army, why would Bashar Al Assad intervene?

A very important development have taken place in the last 2 days.

Shia Iran and Sunni Turkey, the most powerful armies in the region, have now agreed to join their force in combating extremists as a priority in the region. That includes ISIS, Al Qaeeda and Al Nusrah. Turkey has recently declared al Nusrah a 'terrorist' group, thus amputating the Syrian rebels from their main military force. The Syrian rebels are a non existent entity anymore.

The joined military forces of Turkey and Iran are the only forces that could put a end to the mess in Iraq.
They will sooner of later intervene in Iraq. They will also intervene in North Syria once Erdogan will be elected in August as he will seek reconciliation with Bashar al Assad and eradication of the Al Qaeda and al Nusrah fighters from the region.

There is no US conspiracy, it is only incompetence.
Turkey and Iran have shown that the time has come for Shias and Sunnis to unite against their common enemies: armed religious extremists.
On the long run, Israel may see that alliance as a potential threat to them. So its reaction is not clear.

Posted by: Virgile | Jun 10 2014 16:27 utc | 23

"The U.S. must now turn away from the insurgents in Syria and support the Syrian government troops in their fight against the common enemy. Unless that happens the ISIS problem will only fester and threaten more states in the Middle East including Jordan and Turkey."

But not Israel. The west's "al qaida" creation will never bother Israel for some odd reason.

Posted by: scalawag | Jun 10 2014 16:30 utc | 24


"Israel, worried about the Islamists soon at their doors are now in favor of keeping Bashar al Assad in power."

(buzzer) WRONG!

Israel could give a flying fuck about extremists at its door as it was their PLAN ALL ALONG to have different sects of extremists battle it out so that sovereign nations are destabilized, permanently if at all possible. As Dahoit mentions the Yinon Plan is going along swimmingly especially as we must remember that this plan was cooked up 30+ YEARS AGO! Don't ever think that apartheid genocidal Israelis are NOT playing the long game.

What you're essentially saying is a rehash of the nonsense horseshit that gatekeeper extraordinaire Noam Chomsky has been trying to sell us since early on in the Syrian conflict namely that poor little Israel is just so confused by the situation in Syria that it's "sitting this one out" and even maybe hoping that Assad retains power. As if.

Fucking bullshit. Israel and the US - difference? - LOVE to see chaos and fanatics and disintegration. It's easy/cheap to maintain, it allows them military dominance, it allows them cover for the thievery of resources and hosts of other terrible shit.

The US is NOT NOT NOT incompetent when it comes to killing and stealing because it they were they - the perpetrators - would be in prison or NOT STILL KILLING AND STEALING.

What is it that people have such a hard time understanding about this concept? Holy fuck.

The US is successful until 1) some one stops them 2) rolls back their ill-gotten gains and 3) prosecutes those responsible for the crimes they have committed.

Until that time, taking the stance that they are incompetent only allows these war criminals to create the narrative that mitigates said crimes. Can't hold us responsible, we're just retarded. Sorry.

Seriously. These criminals are currently CONSCIOUSLY committing war crimes. They have a LOOOONG track record of CONSCIOUSLY committing war crimes. They premeditated on each and every one of their war crimes.

Where is the INCOMPETENCE? Incompetence implies that you're not up to a situation you're facing.

How can the US Establishment be incompetent when they are facing situations that THEY CONSCIOUSLY CREATED?!!!

Jeezus H. Christ.

Posted by: JSorrentine | Jun 10 2014 16:52 utc | 25

harry law @13

"I agree the Zionists must be laughing, all being acted out now in real time"

They are doing more than that. The 'Greater Israel' would give them control of all the oil/gas in eastern Mediterranean. Interestingly there was a closed invitation-only session at the Herzliya (security of Israel) conference a while back considering the problem of what Israel should with its oil/gas reserves should oil reach $250 a barrel - keep or sell? Now what would cause oil to spike that high? Closure of the Persian Gulf perhaps? Removal of Russia as a supplier?

Posted by: Yonatan | Jun 10 2014 16:56 utc | 26

Video: Convoy fleeing Mosul attacked - many civilian casualties.
Video: Iraqi troops flee Mosul, pelted with stones

Posted by: b | Jun 10 2014 17:01 utc | 27

So now Iraq face the same terror west have supported against Syria.

What the hell is wrong with the west?!

Posted by: Anonymous | Jun 10 2014 17:06 utc | 28

The Anbar Awakening Sunnis are America's gift to the Iraqis.

Posted by: g_h | Jun 10 2014 17:37 utc | 29

This is catastrophic news. Mosul is the third largest city in Iraq, but also in recent years has been the most wealthy. Thing about this city in the Kurdish North, is that its the main place where US oil companies operate and has previously been considered relatively safe. Already the US is looking into "emergency military aid".

The fact that the Iraqi Army for the second time this year just ran away and fled a major city instead of fighting is a distastourous sign. I would say these soldiers will need to be arrested if anything to give a message to others that fleeing will not be tolerated.

Posted by: Colm O' Toole | Jun 10 2014 17:43 utc | 30

It is obvious that Israel wants Bashar Al Assad and Al Maliki to stay in power in now seriously weakened country. They can't hope for better protection.

The frustrated Iraqi Sunnis would like to reestablish the lost-with-Saddam-Hussein Sunni power and they are opening up to Al Qaeda and other islamists.

I guess a taste of Al Qaeda may make the Sunni population of Falujah and Mossoul, now sympathetic to ISIS, to change their mind, just like the population in Al Raqqa in Syria. It is a matter of time that they'll beg the Shias, the Iranians, the Turks and the Kurds to free them from ISIS and eradicate them.
Iran and Turkey have vowed to do that in the region. Will they soon enough?

Posted by: Virgile | Jun 10 2014 17:48 utc | 31

80% of Syria rebels are Islamist, senior IDF officer says

Read more: 80% of Syria rebels are Islamist, senior IDF officer says | The Times of Israel

Posted by: Virgile | Jun 10 2014 17:51 utc | 32


Trefoil, you can call them 'conspiracy theories' if you want, but considering the long history of American CIA actions, it proves these 'theories' are based on precedent.

Look up some names who have been overthrown by CIA coups, like Joao Guilart, Salvador Allende, Jacobo Arbenz, or keep living in the dark.

Posted by: Massinissa | Jun 10 2014 18:06 utc | 33

"The US is successful until 1) some one stops them 2) rolls back their ill-gotten gains and 3) prosecutes those responsible for the crimes they have committed."

You dont seriously expect those three things to happen in your lifetime do you? Or at least 2 and 3. Because those arnt happening. 1 might happen though, if we put enough faith in the RussiaChina axis, but thats it. Theres never ever ever going to be legal prosecution of USA warcrimes.

Posted by: Massinissa | Jun 10 2014 18:08 utc | 34


"They cant hope for better protection"

They can actually: They pay the terrorists in question so the terrorists wont bite back.

Posted by: Massinissa | Jun 10 2014 18:10 utc | 35

Colm O'Toole Catastrophic news indeed,the black flags of AQI hang all over Mosul, they have captured vast amounts of weaponry armored trucks etc [some procured from the US have been seen driving across the Syrian border, the Iraqi army fled and left their weapons. An Iraqi official has just admitted that this is disastrous and has declared a state of emergency. First thing they should do is cashier all the officers responsible.

Posted by: harry law | Jun 10 2014 18:33 utc | 36

b, about the second video I read a tweet saying that it was from some event a few months ago. It seems there is very few videos or images coming from Mosul or Iraq at the moment. There may be big problems with Internet connection there as some tweets said that the main cables go precisely through Mosul.

If the rumours that I read through Tweeter are half truth this doesn't even look like a simple ISIS operation but a new Sunni uprising. There may also be some truth in those saying that the old baathist resistance is behind ISIS (or parts of ISIS). That may also explain why ISIS and the Syrian Armed Forces just seem to avoid fighting each other in some areas. It also may explain why ISIS basically stopped expanding in Syria, they redirected their resources mainly to operations in Iraq.

The current Iraqi army won't fight. It still seems to be formed by badly motivated low morale recruits that just stand there for the pay but will. It the same army that the US tried to create and failed. Sunni recruits will defect and even join 'ISIS' or whatever really forms the Sunni insurgent groups. Shiite recruits won't fight to defend the Sunni population that so much despises them. The real Shiite army and militias will appear now to defend the shiite enclaves around Baghdad if attacked. The Kurds will defend Kurdistan and perhaps eventually try to control Kirkuk and Mosul to add them to their de-facto state.

In this situation western air bombing or drone attacks won't really help much to regain control of the area.

I still can't fully understand how the whole area seems to have fallen out of control of the Baghdad authorities in just a three days unless more stuff that just some 'ISIS' (the Al Qaeda that even Al Qaeda doesn't support!) attacks is happening in the ground.

Posted by: ThePaper | Jun 10 2014 18:57 utc | 37

And for some reason western media seems to be attempting to ignore this mess. Truth be that we don't even have 'news' as Baghdad authorities seems to be in complete chaos and I haven't seem many credible reports coming out since this morning.

Posted by: ThePaper | Jun 10 2014 19:00 utc | 38

Wasn't ISIS/L Turkey's proxy in the Shah Suleiman pretext leaked Erdogan tape? So them attacking a city close to disputed Kurdish areas signifies what? In the context of the Turkish Kurdish oil deal?

Just wondering.

Posted by: somebody | Jun 10 2014 19:00 utc | 39

From the link above

In Michu, a deserted Arab hamlet on the edge of the front lines, Abdo Sino, a paunchy YPG commander, echoes the view that Turkey is complicit in the violence. He points to a cluster of cinder block houses lying just south of the YPG dugout. The village, al-Rawiya, is under ISIS control. Sino and his men had carried out a hit-and-run raid against al-Rawiya on May 27, killing eight ISIS fighters and prompting the revenge attack on al-Tleiliye. “Two Turkish ambulances picked up their wounded and carried back them to Turkey. We saw it all through our field glasses,” Sino claimed.

Many of the ISIS fighters are Chechens and Azeris. Sino shows us pictures he took of the dead combatants with his mobile phone. They have pale white skin, long curly hair and unkempt beards. Next comes a well-thumbed pocket manual titled “The Muslims’ Citadel.” It is filled with Quranic verses exalting martyrdom and was printed in Azerbaijan. Sino says he found it in the pocket of one of the slain ISIS men.

YPG fighters in Michu are adamant that their ISIS foes continue to be allowed safe passage through Turkey. “We are going to bury [Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip] Erdogan right here, in Rojava,” vows one young fighter. But the battle has reached a stalemate, and the finger of blame is shifting toward Damascus, a further sign of the fraying entente between President Bashar al-Assad and the Kurds.

This temporary peace was forged when the regime redeployed its troops from the Kurdish areas in summer 2012 to fight opposition forces elsewhere in the country — and some say to get back at Turkey for its unabashed campaign to topple Assad. The ensuing vacuum allowed the Kurds to share power, albeit symbolically, with Christian and Arab locals.

The Kurds’ overtures to minorities (they have allowed the Assyrian Orthodox Christians to form their own battalion to defend themselves and to help fight al-Qaeda) and their policy of empowering women (about a third of the YPG’s fighting force is female) have won them fawning reviews in the Western media. But Western governments led by Washington continue to spurn contact with the Rojava administration because of pressure from Turkey, a NATO ally, but also because the Kurds refuse to take up arms against Assad. But for how long, a growing number ask.

Assad’s recent battlefield gains are prompting worries that his next move will be against the Kurds. Until such time, he is using ISIS to keep them in check, the Kurds claim.

“Why else is the Syrian army turning a blind eye to ISIS activities around areas under its control?” asked Salih Muslim, the co-chair of the Democratic Unity Party (PYD), the political arm of the YPG, in a recent interview with Al-Monitor. Such fears have prompted the Kurds to hedge their bets. Muslim confirmed that Rojava officials had initiated new talks with the Istanbul-based Syrian opposition to secure recognition of their fledgling administration.

He hopes that the recent trickle of US-funded aid through Kurdish-controlled Northern Iraq will pave the way to formal contact with Washington.

Relations with Ankara are also showing signs of a thaw. Since March, Turkey has been allowing limited aid to be delivered twice a week through the Mursitpinar border gate to the YPG-controlled town of Jarabalus (Kobane in Kurdish), under blockade by ISIS. And a new set of secret talks are reportedly underway between the PYD and Turkey’s national intelligence agency, MIT. These moves are closely bound up with Ankara’s peace negotiations with imprisoned PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan, who is widely revered in Rojava. Mohammed Kemal, the Rojava official in charge of press relations, told Al-Monitor, “We have been instructed from the top [by Ocalan] to stop talking about Turkey’s support for ISIS.” The news had apparently not yet filtered to the YPG fighters in Michu.

Chechen and Azeri? Does not sound like a local uprising.

Posted by: somebody | Jun 10 2014 19:08 utc | 40

ISIS vs. Taliban.
You will like this analysis:

Posted by: KerKaraje | Jun 10 2014 19:09 utc | 41

Thank you very much KerKaraje. WONDERFUL analysis.

Posted by: Massinissa | Jun 10 2014 19:17 utc | 42

Colm #30. This has to go much deeper than just lack of discipline in the military. It reflects a very fundamental problem with the political leadership. The problem is illustrated with Malaki. He has been the number 1 for how many years now?: eight or so. Presumably it is a parliamentary system but he was never able to put together a majority coalition. From the very beginning he refused to engage in working with those Sunni leaders that were willing to engage in electoral politics. Majority coalitions serve a major role in that they give incentive to minority groups to identify with and support the central government. I fear the Shiites spent too many years on the outside looking in and have no sense on how to run a multicultural society like Iraq.

I think Paper is on to something. To lose an entire city like Mosul probably means that there were some major leaders there whose loyalty was not entirely behind Baghdad. ISIS could be a front for other players or perhaps these players are hoping to be able to control events once the central government is discredited.

Posted by: ToivoS | Jun 10 2014 19:18 utc | 43

I don't see much of a percentage for the USA in this one, unless perhaps Iraq has to strike a coalition deal with the Kurds in order to prevent its being overrun and the price is a Kurdish state. Turkey would lose its mind if that happened. Everything suggests this is something that got out of control, and was not supposed to happen. Sow the wind, and reap the whirlwind. The USA has already had a sterling example of how military action in Iraq can escalate until it absorbs your whole army; and quite a few people muttered, after they messed it up last time, that it would only be 5 years or so before they had to come back and do it all again. That looks almost prescient, dunnit?

If the USA has to go back into Iraq for another military adventure, look for Iran to throw everything it has into keeping the USA tied down and bleeding out. The USA has operated, more or less throughout the last two presidencies, as though it did not need friends. Well, then, knock yourself out.

Posted by: Mark | Jun 10 2014 19:23 utc | 44

@41 kerkarje. thanks for the link. it is informative.

from your link
"Both the Taliban and ISIS have their ideological roots and a major portion of their financial backing in Saudi Arabia and to a smaller extent in other Wahhabi dominated Arab countries in the Persian Gulf. The official line of the Saudi government is to declare and regard ISIS an enemy, but the government is at best unable and at worst unwilling to prevent “private donors” from funding the salaries, the training, the arming and the logistics of ISIS:
It was the same with the Taliban. It were the Saudis who bankrolled their offensives by supplying hundreds of gun-mounted Datsun pickup trucks over and over again, while Pakistani Madrassas – often funded by Saudis and preaching Wahhabism – provided the man power."

Posted by: james | Jun 10 2014 19:24 utc | 45

So now the great "anti-imperialist" 'b' is advocating a "united front" with the USA, pushing for US intervention? Cuz you know, ISIS is "worse than Al Qaeda"?

That's what happens with "leftists" abandon the perspective of the masses (workers, peasants, farmers, students etc) to prioritize the logic of The Chessboard. They lose their political-moral compass and end up shills for Yankee imperialism. I LIKE the US out of Iraq, and want to keep it that way.

The end of that compass-less road is to end up like a JSore-arse sociopath.

With terfoil and stranger:

"Meantime, over here you guys sound like McCain, when you think you're being all leftist cool or something.

"So, this is how it is in the real world. If you continue to want to live in a conspiracy-driven US-centric world, feel free. It will have only an accidental relationship to actual reality though."

Posted by: Matt | Jun 10 2014 19:34 utc | 46

#46 So now the great "anti-imperialist" 'b' is advocating a "united front" with the USA

That is totally absurd. b is not advocating any such thing. He is simply imagining some weird coalitions that might result from this mess.

Posted by: ToivoS | Jun 10 2014 19:53 utc | 47

"I LIKE the US out of Iraq, and want to keep it that way."

"With terfoil and stranger:"

What is it summer-break at Retard University? Don't you guys have swim lessons to go to? Don't forget your floaties!

You people think the US is OUT OF IRAQ? Holy fuck. Who do you think is manipulating/arming/paying/buying off all of these different "terrorist groups"? WHY do you think the apartheid genocidal state of Israel WANTS sovereign nations - i.e., the Yinon Plan - dissolved even if that means having to deal with jihadists etc? Gee, could it be that both war criminal states find it's easier and cheaper to pit one group - which the US arms/funds - against another group - the US arms/funds - indefinitely?

As Mike Whitney showed the US oil companies are just beginning to finally reap the largesse from the invasion 11 years ago and Lockheed Martin just delivered it's first half of a $6 billion deal with Iraq yet you people think that the US would jeopardize its gains by not staying involved there?!!!

Holy shit, no wonder American peons are getting ass-raped daily. We have people who actually believe what Obama et al are saying. We're out of Iraq. Holy shit.

Hey, doofus parade, is Israel a beacon of democracy, too? Because I think I've heard Obama et al tell me that one as well.

I bet you're all loving this fantastically improving economy, too, right?

I mean, as you apparently believe whatever the fuck Obama tells you, why not post in the Ukraine threads about how you think the whole business is really just an exercise in democracy and some such nonsense.

BTW, I never called for more US intervention but if you think that my recognizing continued US involvement in Iraq et al. as such then I might write to your dean and ask that you be put on Double Secret Retard Probation or something.

Seriously, though, do NOT forget your floaties.

Posted by: JSorrentine | Jun 10 2014 20:09 utc | 48

Good article by Patrick Cockburn in Counterpunch:

"...Isis specialises in using militarily untrained foreign volunteers as suicide bombers either moving on foot wearing suicide vests, or driving vehicles packed with explosives. Often more than one suicide bomber is used, as happened yesterday when a vehicle exploded at the headquarters of a Kurdish party, the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan in the town of Jalawla in the divided and much fought-over province of Diyala, north-east of Baghdad. In the confusion caused by the blast, a second bomber on foot slipped into the office and blew himself up, killing some 18 people, including a senior police officer.

Posted by: okie farmer | Jun 10 2014 20:13 utc | 49

The argument that the American political Elite would have been punished by the American populace if merely incompetent rather than masterfully evil is of course fatuous.
If there is a cohesive conspiracy banking on the strategy that militant jihadism can be truncated before surrounding and penetrating Israel it would be exemplary of more incompetence, of course being evil at the same time.

Posted by: truthbetold | Jun 10 2014 20:21 utc | 50

Glory to Ukraine! To the heroes Glory! – Слава Україні! Героям слава!*

(* What you say when you screw up something #doublesuperplusgood.)

Posted by: Petri Krohn | Jun 10 2014 20:59 utc | 51

From the Counterpunch article okiefarmer linked to:

"The military sophistication of Isis in Iraq is much greater than al-Qa’ida, the organisation out of which it grew, which reached the peak of its success in 2006-07 before the Americans turned many of the Sunni tribes against it."

Even greater than the organization that repeatedly defeated the entirety of America's defense systems on 9/11?!!!

HOLY FUCK!!!!Who knows what they're capable of then!!!!Maybe they have a fucking spaceship!!!

Oh, so the "newly-hatched" - nudge, wink - ISIS terror group grew out of the US-created/funded organization Al-Qaeda and is now poised to become the new Taliban ANOTHER group that the US helped create/fund through the Pakistani ISI so many yeas ago.

Got it. But it's really the KSA doing all of this on their own, right? chortle.

Gee, sounds like a new villain is being rolled out for the next false flag attack!

Taliban Al-Ciada ISIS

Totally evil: check
Totally secretive: check
Totally funded/directed - nudge/wink - by evil Muslims and NOT the US: check

But, JSorrentine, are ISIS' atrocities well-documented on the pages of known intelligence-front organizations like Amnesty and HRW? Why, funny you should ask, they sure ARE!!!

Yup, looks like we have a new roll-out boys and girls!!!!

And just when you thought the GWOT was over!!!!

Posted by: JSorrentine | Jun 10 2014 21:03 utc | 52

The plan for Iraq, from the first, was that it be broken into three, very manageable pieces: a Kurdistan dependent on Israel and the imperialists, an ally and base.
A Sunni Arab statelet, co-operating with Jordan and the Saudis, straddling the borders in the north and the Gulf.
And a greatly weakened Shia state.

The capture of ancient Mosul would seem to signify that the plan is on the verge of success.

At risk of provoking the god like thundering of J Sorrentine: the evidence that psychopathic behaviour, even over more than two centuries, cannot mesh with incompetence is very sparse.

The incompetence we see in Washington is of the classical, Greek tragedy, nature. It is hubris born of the delusion that the US cannot be beaten, which implies that it matters little who is guiding it. The White Star Line was similarly deluded and, because the Titanic was unsinkable, it appointed an aged roue and salesman, rather than a keen young mariner to her command.

I'm inclined to truthbetold's view @50: uprisings, like the one involving ISIS are very easy to start. All that is needed are the resources that the US has readily to hand, from the old mercenaries of Sunni Awakening days, and the Saudi armourers and paymasters to a pallet or two of greenbacks.
But what happens then, especially if the sponsored 'jihadists' find a base for their power, is harder to control.
US foreign policy is in the hands of arsonists, indeed looking at US domestic and environmental policy one could argue that the entire country is being run by arsonists soaked in whisky, laced with cocaine. It would be wrong to assume that, because they are smart enough to start fires they will be sensible enough to leave the scene before they get consumed by them.

Massinissa@ 33
The list you give, as you undoubtedly know, is very summary. You can add to it coups in Greece, Turkey and Italy. Multiple "false flag" terror attacks across Europe, with thousands of casualties; innumerable Palace coups, including the plot to replace British PM Harold Wilson in the late 1960s; and the entire Gladio enterprise run out of the Pentagon, not to mention NATO itself.

And Europe, it should be recalled, is the one area of the world in which the US has acted with relative restraint. It would be hard to think of a state in the Third World where the US has not intervened in the domestic politics to empower its puppets.

Posted by: bevin | Jun 10 2014 21:05 utc | 53


Is your reading comprehension ok?

Because I just read the damn thing over and nowhere does B say he supports any of this.

Posted by: Massinissa | Jun 10 2014 21:23 utc | 54


To be honest, I have never heard of Harold Wilson before. I have to look this up.

Posted by: Massinissa | Jun 10 2014 21:24 utc | 55

I thought US trained the iraqi army? Apparently not, although these groups that have taken over, is really demented people commiting murder after murder as can be seen on youtube.

any bet obama will start bombing iraq again?

Posted by: Anonymous | Jun 10 2014 21:31 utc | 56

Here's some interesting info dated March 10, 2007

Abu Omar al Bagdadi

Especially the last line is pretty interesting.

The capture of Abu Tahla and a host of his leaders in the spring of 2005 led to the dismantlement al Qaeda's network in the Mosul region. As U.S. and Iraqi forces are stripping troops to provide security in Baghdad and the surrounding regions, al Qaeda in Iraq will attempt to push into areas where there are security gaps. Mosul is one such region.

Posted by: Gehenna | Jun 10 2014 22:01 utc | 57

Sunni jihadists, in some concert with Baathists, killed and wounded a significant fraction of US casualties in the Iraq War.
Bush of course exagerrated the fraction, pretending there was no home grown Iraqi resistance when in fact most Iraqis approved of the attacks on US forces, provided Iraqi innocents didn't get killed. Wolfowitz-Perle-Bush-Cheney did not want the average American to realize
decided majorities of both Sunni and Shia hated American occupation, did not consider American liberators with good intentions.

Were the Sunni jihadists, believers in Arab caliphate of whatever national provenance, funded still by the American Empire at that time, or was it blowback,in the pay of KSA elements, not necessarily official, and by other rich benefactors? Tens of thousands of US troops didn't leave the scene soon enough, to save life and limb.

But let's ask the Iranian government just now if favors the Iraq of 2002 or the Iraq of 2014, even with all its uncertainty.

Yes, let's consider an Iranian-centric viewpoint rather than the earlier criticised American-centered conspiratological viewpoint.

Posted by: truthbetold | Jun 10 2014 22:12 utc | 58

@The Paper
The Turkey-Kurdistan oil deal may well have something to do with this. That has caused some friction in the Iraqi government.

We may see ISIS trying to take control of North Iraq to control the oil fields. ISIS is already pushing forward to gain control of the stretch of land from Raqqa to Deir al Zour to firmly control the oil fields there which is one of the sources of their wealth (the other being food since they destroyed many industrial bakeries and they control the few operating ones).

Either they are after the oil and territory or taking Mosul is their way of driving a wedge between the Kurds and the Shia and the Iraqi Kurds and the Syrian Kurds (YPG) (the latter is something the Turks have been doing as well).
I'd go with both.

Finally I'd like to point out this article on ISIS' evolution on the battlefield.
ISIS in Syria

Posted by: Gehenna | Jun 10 2014 22:17 utc | 59

Bevin @53 "The incompetence we see in Washington is of the classical, Greek tragedy, nature. It is hubris born of the delusion that the US cannot be beaten." Mike Whitney has a similar take in Counterpunch in relation to Ukraine Admiral Cecil Haney, commander, US Strategic Command on the deployment of B-2 stealth bombers to Europe.
“Against stupidity, no amount of planning will prevail.”
- Carl von Clausewitz

Posted by: harry law | Jun 10 2014 22:32 utc | 60

The paradox of US military "aid."

Arms Windfall for Insurgents as Iraq City Falls – THE NEW YORK TIMES, June 10, 2014

“You have to make sure of who you’re training,” Maj. Gen. Patrick J. Donahue II, the commander of United States Army soldiers operating in Africa, said in an interview last month. “It can’t be the standard, ‘Has this guy been a terrorist or some sort of criminal?’ but also, ‘What are his allegiances? Is he true to the country, or is he still bound to his militia?’ ”

Anyone in US training has his allegiances messed up. They are by definition serving the Empire, not their own country. How could these mercenary whores have allegiances to anyone, least of all their country?

Posted by: Petri Krohn | Jun 10 2014 22:45 utc | 61

Whitney says the US oligarchs are 'FINALLY' starting to reap the harvest of a successful conspiracy initiated eleven years ago?
Shucks, I read a slew of conspiratological experts in 2003 agreeing with Wolfowtiz that the war would be a cakewalk with a submissive
pro-Israel puppet installed in the same year and the oil flowing to Israel soon after.
Then it would be on to a successful invasion of Iran which by 2004 or 5 would be run by Westernizers who had made their peace with Israel.

Posted by: truthbetold | Jun 10 2014 22:46 utc | 62


That was the plan. Reality gets in the way of the Neocons, for better or for worse.

Posted by: Massinissa | Jun 10 2014 23:04 utc | 63

53;The funny thing is(well,not really funny,but strange)America has lost the last couple of wars,you would think their delusion would be shattered by now eh?
58;Well whatever Iran thinks,they weren't the cause and effect,US idiots were.

Posted by: dahoit | Jun 10 2014 23:09 utc | 64

Right about Iran, dahoit, but Chalabi could have played them.

Posted by: truthbetold | Jun 10 2014 23:15 utc | 65

And how about Shillary's new mask of deception,the best facelift money can buy eh,Was her feigned illness cover?God,I detest that woman.A serial liar,conniver,murderer and traitor,too bad feminazis,homonazis and zionazis disagree.Hopefully they will be outnumbered.
And the absolute silence on the myriad interventions of American forces and their proxies,and dire results from said idiotic martial nonsense is indeed Orwellian.I wonder if he saw the menace of Zion before his demise?

Posted by: dahoit | Jun 10 2014 23:21 utc | 66

@59, Gehenna, that is truly bizarre. The ISIS report is like the yearly report from a mutual fund; but instead of graphs detailing return on investments, they detail the number of terrorist acts, broken down into categories, suicide bombs, ieds, assassinations etc. All conveniently layed out in pie charts and bar graphs, with logos for the different "operations". The mind boggles.

Posted by: ruralito | Jun 11 2014 0:03 utc | 67

The attack of Mossoul is simply the revenge of Saudi Arabia on Iran and Turkey and indirectly on the USA for allowing the re-election of Bashar Al Assad in Syria and Al Maliki in Iraq..
Saudi Arabia has been lately pushed aside, humiliated and rendered irrelevant. Politically it has re-affirmed its role by supporting Sissi election in Egypte and militarily by using the only effective army they have, Al Qaeda in Iraq and Syria.
Saudi Arabia is a scourge.

Posted by: Virgile | Jun 11 2014 0:14 utc | 68

Posted by: ruralito | Jun 10, 2014 8:03:57 PM | 67

Yes and you expected anything else? They have to account the numbers to their western masters.

Posted by: jo6pac | Jun 11 2014 0:16 utc | 69

Bush of course exagerrated the fraction, pretending there was no home grown Iraqi resistance when in fact most Iraqis approved of the attacks on US forces, provided Iraqi innocents didn't get killed. Wolfowitz-Perle-Bush-Cheney did not want the average American to realize decided majorities of both Sunni and Shia hated American occupation, did not consider American liberators with good intentions.

While the Straussian elite expressed in PNAC a need to initially fool people with a "Pearl Harbor type" event to kickoff the entire GWOT, after said false flag event I don't believe the thoughts/perceptions of the average American ever again - not once especially during during the world-wide Iraq War protests - factored into any of TPTB's evil machinations. After 9/11, it is my belief that any faux/bullshit discussion/debate about any part of the GWOT - or anything else - were strictly meant as a facade, to make it SEEM as if TPTB - any of them and war criminals all - gave a flying fuck about what any one really thought. The world literally changed post-9/11 in that - and they even told us this supposedly - that they were no longer bound by the rules which had normally governed our lives as rational beings.

So, people think they just "lucked out" that Obama didn't prosecute any of them once out of office? That there was really even a discussion/question about any of the GWOT being rolled back? That these fuckers didn't KNOW that they could do what they wanted as they were creating their new reality/narrative? I mean, what if the "stolen elections" events of 2000 and 2004 were simply psyops meant to make it seem as if the US had a functioning democracy and thus that it was imperative that the common citizen fight to get those election laws changed. We just have to fix the system not get rid of it, right? Pretty clever, huh? To get people screaming about a stolen election when the election doesn't fucking matter to begin with? And Gore and Lieberman or Kerry would really have been ANY different? Really?

Nope. If you look at the faux transition between W. and Obama as merely an already planned-on bit of theater to keep the masses busy - oooh, I can't wait till Obama prosecutes all of those meanies! - then you can see that TPTB's purported and reported timelines - yes, all of them - were also just meaningless fluff but meaningless fluff meant to raise people's expectations and hopes and to string along any of the military brass who may have had doubts. Certainly, activity has tapered off in certain arenas - e.g., Iraq - but only enough to ensure that things remain fucked up there while TPTB move assets to new arenas of chaos - e.g. Libya, Syria, Ukraine etc - and back again if need be. And always with an eye to creating a new boogeyman. ISIS?

Again, one aspect of the realization of Obama's "betrayal" is that b/c TPTB knew in advance that any of their timelines/rationales concerning the GWOT were just meaningless baubles thrown into the propagandosphere without ANY substance/basis whatsoever. Thus, they knew way before everyone else that there would be ZERO repercussions to themselves or their careers. That, yes, it might take 11 years for things to quiet down in Iraq so that the oil companies would then be able to rape the land. That although seemingly a little behind schedule the Yinon Plan is still successfully underway. It's all acceptable when you're not going anywhere.

Remember: the important part - once the limits of timelines/repercussions/prosecution for war crimes have been effectively lifted and they have - is just getting things started. Once the whole shit-ball is rolling, TPTB knew that they had the excuse to wedge their foot in the door and IT NO LONGER MATTERED how long it really took to finally achieve their goals. They weren't going anywhere but especially not to prison. Sit back, make a few mil being a contractor somewhere and enjoy the ride!!It's going to be a long one.

This is why I don't think they're incompetent because I don't see any of their actions - no matter how seemingly inept/damaging - ENDANGERING their status/livelihoods/power in any way, shape or form.

Once you realize that there is no political mechanism by which to effectively remove these people from power you realize that if you're NOT talking about/figuring out HOW to remove them from power you are just wasting time and TPTB have all the time - and money and power - in the world. I'm as guilty as the rest at times.

Ukraine/Iraq/Libya/Syria are fucking chaotic right now and that's all that really matters. While we discuss here how TPTB are certainly on a path of imminent destruction they're plotting the next chapter of war criminality which us peons will then discuss and how THOSE EVENTS are really going to be the end of their reign or terror or something along those lines.

Once it has been shown that all of our - meaning that of conscientious people - political and historical analysis doesn't have any bearing upon our leaders' "understanding" - for lack of a better word - or calculations as to what they are/should be doing - and this has been apparent for some time now - then we probably should stop listening/engaging and change the focus/tenor of the societal discussion.

Lastly and then I'm out, my point concerning the different sets/sects of terror groups is that nearly all of them can claim the US as their main benefactor/creator in some way shape or form so when reading about their resurgences and falls it's quite difficult to believe IMO that one shouldn't immediately think that the US is fucking around once again - as if they've ever stopped fucking around anywhere to date.

Posted by: JSorrentine | Jun 11 2014 0:43 utc | 70

The US is helping ISIS, and again we're on the wrong side. How was Mosul captured in less than 24 hours? It was a brilliant way for the US to arm ISIS without getting their fingerprints on the deal. We're dealing with lunatics in Washington who have no regard for the consequences of their actions. I wouldn't put anything past them: even a 'limited' nuclear war.

Posted by: Al Neuman | Jun 11 2014 0:45 utc | 71


And quite possibly Australian Prime Minister Gough Whitlam who pulled Australian troops out of Vietnam and called for an end to inference by foreign governments (namely, the U.S.) in Australia.

Posted by: Fran Too | Jun 11 2014 2:24 utc | 72

Maybe ISIS fighters are finding it easier to invade Iraq where the only opponent is the weak and divided Iraqi army rather than stay in Syria when they are facing the ruthless al Nusrah fighters, the Kurds, the USA supported FSA and the strong Syrian Army.
Will Syria get a relief at the expenses of Irak? Is Jordan next?

Posted by: Virgile | Jun 11 2014 2:24 utc | 73

How close is Mosul to the main oil fields and will the ISIS attack them?
You can bet the US will try to protect the oil first.

Posted by: plantman | Jun 11 2014 3:55 utc | 74

What did the Iraqis running Mosul do that pissed off the west and brought on a western invasion of "al cia-da" mercs into Mosul.

Has anybody asked that question?

Posted by: scalawag | Jun 11 2014 4:01 utc | 75

It seems very difficult to build an effective army that isn't representing a threatened minority group. I can't think of many successful examples in the last few decades.

Posted by: Crest | Jun 11 2014 4:13 utc | 76

Posted by: plantman | Jun 10, 2014 11:55:03 PM | 74

A major motivation for the Fake War on Terror was keeping sales of cheap, light crude low enough to keep oil prices artificially high in order to make fracking seem economical.
Iraq, Iran & Libya all have substantial reserves of easy-to-get-at light crude and could afford to sell it for half the current market price. Saddam & Ghaddafi, and to a lesser extent Iran, made the utterly criminal blunder (in the eyes of Wall St) of 'wasting' the oil revenue on raising general living standards via free heath care, cheap housing, etc instead of putting US/UK/Fr oil corporations in charge of extraction & profit distribution.
The Mosul Iraqis were probably behaving as if they owned Iraq's oil and thought they could spend the revenue in Iraq, on Iraqis.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Jun 11 2014 5:28 utc | 77

May be 'Fickie' Nuland and Mc Cain can go to Mosul to distribute cookies and Sundis to the 'liberated' people of the town.

Posted by: Sufi | Jun 11 2014 6:19 utc | 78

@ruralito 62: I also read some accounts a while ago how Al Shabaab (Somalia) had kept a detailed accounting of how much money was spent on gasoline and other stuff. This goes for all of Al Qaeda therefore ISIS as well.

@virgile 73: ISIS did it in 2007 and is doing it today. Why? Because Mosul is a city in a predominantly Kurdish environment but the city itself has a high Sunni Arab population so it's pretty easy for them to blend in. According to Syrian accounts they have depended on infiltrators/sleepers in the past so I wouldn't put it past them that they used them this time.

As stated earlier in one of the comments above the low morale and the internal division seems like the biggest factor in the Iraqi army pulling out (fleeing).

Update: this must be phase 2 of the operation:
ISIS pushes into Oil town

Posted by: Gehenna | Jun 11 2014 8:12 utc | 79

I don't think the US and the West are any worried about this surge of fundamentalist terrorist groups, because they are the ones fuelling it. After all, if they really wanted to get rid of terrorists they should go and clean up the training camps that have flourished in the south of Lybia, where terrorists train in open air, without ever being bothered by the western air forces who could wipe them out in a minute.
In the end terrorism is like drug smuggling in Colombia and Mexico, the very same that most vehemently claim to fight against it are those that are fuelling it. The aim if to intervene militarily and take hold of countries. Look at Colombia: after nearly 50 years of struggle against drugs, the business is healthier than ever and has ever spread to Mexico. On the other hand, with this pretext, the US have established a very solid bridge head into Latin America from where they can attack any one. Most probably, the next candidate for an attack is Venezuela, but countries like Brazil are not any safer in the long run.

Posted by: MC | Jun 11 2014 8:49 utc | 80

Maliki calls for the arming of civilians in order to defeat terrorism, it is a wonder he did not call for these armed civilians to give cover to the heavily armed [with the latest weapons]Iraqi military, so that they could run away in safety without being shot at by ISIS.

Posted by: harry law | Jun 11 2014 9:07 utc | 81

....Chandon: The thing is there has been unjust things that have happened and I’m aware of the demonstrations, which sister Dahlia is referring to in Anbar province and obviously that didn’t help the situation.

Nevertheless this goes to before 2013 doesn’t it? It goes right back to the occupation when post 2003 the war of aggression by the USA and Britain we had this emergence of the second generation al-Qaeda led by Zarqawi, which was just brutal in its ruthlessness and bloody-minded nature against Christians and people of the Shia faith; and also against Sunnis who they branded whatever they wanted to brand to justify depravity against them.

So, I think yes Maleki has a responsibility, but I would argue Maleki and the entity that he represents is a profound contradiction. Within that contradiction there is something positive to defend, but there’s also the very deeply problematic aspect of that contradiction as well; and that we actually do have to hold to account when understanding and analyzing this, the other major players.

Iraq has always been like many other countries across the Global South, the victim of external players who are trying to manipulate the situation for their own interests.

I think the great challenge is, is the challenge of unity in defending their neighboring states particularly Syria; and this is a chess game, again, about weakening Iran’s strategic allies in the region in order to soften up and to destroy Iran like they destroyed Libya and they’re destroying Syria and they’re destroying Iraq.

Posted by: Sufi | Jun 11 2014 10:01 utc | 82

RT report that: Turkish consulate attacked, hostage taken.

Posted by: Anonymous | Jun 11 2014 13:23 utc | 83

- Given the mess in Iraq, it was very wise for Muqtada al Sadr to leave Iraq (for the time being). Will Sadr ever return ? I could see him to become the leader of Southern Iraq.
- Iraq, as it was under Saddam Hoessein is finally "toast".

Posted by: Willy2 | Jun 12 2014 9:36 utc | 84

The comments to this entry are closed.