US will help Iraq fight al-Qaeda who control Falluiah

[John ''True Grit'' Wayne]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-25611034

The US secretary of state has said the US will help Iraq fight al-Qaeda-linked militants, but that it is not planning to send troops back to the country.
John Kerry said he was confident the government of Iraqi PM Nouri Maliki could defeat the militants.
Earlier, the Iraqi government said it had lost control of the strategic city of Fallujah, west of Baghdad.
Al-Qaeda-linked militants now control the south of the city, a security source told the BBC.
Iraqi officials said they have lost control to the militant group, the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant, known as Isis.
An Iraqi reporter there says tribesmen allied with al-Qaeda hold the rest of Fallujah.

We seem to forget here that the place is still messed up.Car bombs and rebels taking over areas now how is Kerry going to ''help'' the Iraq leadership without sending troops in.Will he send advisers or drones or what?

What did the Iraq war achieve?

[Dante Von Hespburg]

Just going to put forward a theoretical idea. But isn't it 'Good' for the US and the West that places like Iraq etc are unstable? With the economic hub turning towards the pacific, with the US and potentially other South American, European states (and Russia) set to be producing / Fraking oil, the importance of the Middle east diminishes in terms of economic implications.

http://www.tradearabia.com/news/OGN_244253.html

Huge conventional oil and gas reserves have attracted multi-billion dollar investments in the region for decades. But a boom in US shale oil and gas production over the last few years, and big new finds in Africa have made global energy giants like Exxon Mobil, Shell, Total and BP less keen to invest in unstable parts of the Middle East in the last few years.

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/...80952719124264

America will halve its reliance on Middle East oil by the end of this decade and could end it completely by 2035 due to declining demand and the rapid growth of new petroleum sources in the Western Hemisphere, energy analysts now anticipate.

Thus without the economic importance, the middle east just dosen't seem like a place worth getting involved in (Not at the cost its proven). Thus a cynic might argue the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan served their purposes well enough for the West by destabilizing the region (since spreading to places like Syria and Egypt in the vacuum) who are now so concentrated on regaining stability/ infighting that the US goal of preventing more 9/11's is quite achieved.

Hence why also Kerry has said basically 'we'll support you in spirit'- the US can give arms etc to Iraq in an attempt to keep them occupied at little cost to US lives and capital. (I'd like to point out that i'm not having a go at the US here or indeed any Western country- as a political plan it seems very successful). It's win-win either the middle east remains in a state of chaos, or the Iraqi government wins and is thankful for US support.

In this light, the war on terror is something of a success.

Please also do not i'm not including the measure of success on a moral or humanitarian basis! In both these lights the results are far more dubious than a purely cold and political light from the bias of the West.

[John ''True Grit'' Wayne]

These rebels in Iraq Kerry is against seem to be the same rebels we are supporting in Syria. Aint that strange.Too complacated for my head to understand.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-24179084

[Vanoi]

These rebels in Iraq Kerry is against seem to be the same rebels we are supporting in Syria. Aint that strange.Too complacated for my head to understand.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-24179084

Since when has the US supported the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant? If your going to troll, be good at it.

Oh, and as for the OP i wouldn't ignore these rebels. They are Al-Qaeda, and they are only getting stronger.

[Heathen Hammer]

Since when has the US supported the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant?

US is supporting same guys in Syria.

[Vanoi]

US is supporting same guys in Syria.

Source it then. I want a source showing the US directly sends aid to the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. This should be good.

They have been getting their hands on US aid in Syria and weapons.By supporting the rebels In Syria you are supporting/supplying these same terrorists that are in Iraq.

So are you claiming once again the US sends aid to islamic state Of Iraq and the Levant? There is a big difference between them getting their hands on US aid/weapons and the US actually aiding them.

I'll give you a hint: The US sends aid to the FSA. The FSA is a separate group from the ISIS. Not hard to understand.

[Heathen Hammer]

Source it then. I want a source showing the US directly sends aid to the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. This should be good.

US government is directly supporting insurgents in Syria, who are same guys.

[Condottiere 40K]

Japan and Korea have to import their oil, not to mention Europe. While it might be tempting to let the Chinese fret a bit it probably wouldn't be worth it. Stability is a better guarantee of security than huge military budgets.

I can see a group of Marine military observers telling the Iraqi ground commander stuff like, "Yah see that house over there? My boys had a big problem clearing it. Probably still has an underground tunnel over there connecting it to the school, where chances are is their main ammo dump. You can drop a couple of shells on it, but you'll have to deal with the PR fallout."

[Dante Von Hespburg]

Japan and Korea have to import their oil, not to mention Europe. While it might be tempting to let the Chinese fret a bit it probably wouldn't be worth it. Stability is a better guarantee of security than huge military budgets.

I can see a group of Marine military observers telling the Iraqi ground commander stuff like, "Yah see that house over there? My boys had a big problem clearing it. Probably still has an underground tunnel over there connecting it to the school, where chances are is their main ammo dump. You can drop a couple of shells on it, but you'll have to deal with the PR fallout."

Indeed, but Europe, Japan and Korea (worst Korea this is) can always import from one of the new up and coming sources, for instance one of the articles i've posted have mentioned that extensive deposits are being found in Africa. The fact the US made this great and much vaunted strategic pivot to the Pacific speaks volumes. The Middle East just isn't going to be as important as it once was in terms of oil in the mid-long term.

States such as Qatar and Saudi Arabia i believe are already taking steps to diversify their economies for when the oil/willing consumers runs out.

http://www.gulf-times.com/opinion/18...iversification

The QR1.8bn Helium 2 Plant at the industrial city that was formally inaugurated last week has already made Qatar the largest exporter and second top producer of helium in the world. The plant has a design capacity of 1.3bn standard cubic feet a year, twice that of the first plant – Helium 1.With a combined annual production of 2bn standard cubic feet a year, the two plants will meet about 25% of the current global demand for liquid helium. The product is in great demand worldwide, particularly in emerging countries in Asia.
Two other projects that achieve economic diversification and meet national objectives including decent employment for qualified nationals are the $5.5bn Al Sejeel Petrochemical Complex and a multi-billion dollar petchem project - Al-Karaana, both located at Ras Laffan.
Al Sejeel Petrochemical Complex, which is scheduled for 2018 completion, is unique in that it is the first mixed feed steam cracker in the country and the first one to produce polypropylene. Hitherto, all petchem complexes in Qatar were depending only on one feedstock.
Through Al Sejeel Petrochemical Complex, Qatar is also introducing a product - polypropylene. It will be the first time the country get involved in producing polypropylene.
In addition to polypropylene, Al Sejeel will produce ethylene, high-density polyethylene, linear low-density polyethylene, butadiene and pyrolysis gasoline.

Very interesting developments from Qatar indeed. Another interesting, if less detailed article:

http://www.euromoney.com/Article/318...ion-drive.html

As you can see, some countries in the Middle East are readily and able to exploit this predicted (and inevitable) decline in oil profits and production.

This all relates of course to the fact that with the rise of other oil producing sources, what does the Middle East have for the West? And does this outweigh the (arguably paranoid) western aversion to Islamic extremism which gave rise to the 9/11 tragedy? I think the answer is, as long as their not bothering us, we don't really care that much. The War on Terror has had the (I would argue wanted affect) of destabilizing regimes in an area of potentially high conflict. Making the region look inward at it's own issues for probably the next few decades.

The whole idea of bringing 'Democracy' and a stable government were goals that i rather suspect were optional and wanted...but not necessary. Basically the West merely needed to go in Screw things up and pull out and we'd have the same results we have now as the resulting vacuum is filled with competing groups and ideologies. So again in cynical eye- the whole 'improve life' was a nice optional goal, that looked good with the media. The strategic objectives were more than achieved with the resulting chaos this left the places in.

[conon394]

What did the Iraq war achieve?

Not what its architects talked themselves into what it would achieve easily and than rolled congress.

But failing that the US create the situation and it does have an interest in keeping glued together - although I still some kind hard partition with a very limited Federal structure (very much there just to oil produced and the wealth shared equitably) would have been better.

It will be intresting if the failure of Baghdad to maintain basic order will affect the Kurds and their oil export to Turkey. RIght now they a system up and running but are supposed to wait for central gov OK for export - but if the central governmt is looking weak I wonder if Turkey might not just stop caring in order to have stable buffer zone?

[John ''True Grit'' Wayne]

Since when has the US supported the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant?

They have been getting their hands on US aid in Syria and weapons.By supporting the rebels In Syria you are supporting/supplying these same terrorists that are in Iraq.

Oh, and as for the OP i wouldn't ignore these rebels. They are Al-Qaeda, and they are only getting stronger.

No 1 is ignoring them this is why I made this serious thread about Kerry's statement.Terrorists are infiltrating Syria Palestine Libya Iraq Egypt Yemen.Afghanistan.They are all over the place.It is like playing wack a mole.

Sectarian and ethnic tensions have risen in Iraq since the US withdrawal in December 2011, inflamed by the conflict in neighbouring Syria, where mainly Sunni rebels are trying to oust President Bashar al-Assad, who is backed by Shia Iran.


The Iraqi army has joined forces with local tribesmen to battle al Qaeda, which has teamed up with groups of Syrian rebels to try to create across the Iraqi-Syrian border a state based on strict medieval Sunni Islamic practice.

[Azog 150]

They have been getting their hands on US aid in Syria and weapons.By supporting the rebels In Syria you are supporting/supplying these same terrorists that are in Iraq.

Syria is one incredibly complex, constantly shifting and generally ed up situation. Any arms, funding or any other kind of equipment that goes into that country will inevitably find its way to unintended places. Groups that are working together in one area of the country will at the same time be at loggerheads in a different part of the country, and next week it could be the other way around.

The West has not directly funded or armed extremist groups like the ISIS. The West has directly supported the more moderate umbrella organisation the FSA, and indeed just the other week some of these more moderate rebel groups launched their own offensive on the ISIS. That is not to say that Western aid has not indirectly found its way to the ISIS and other such extremist groups. Even the FSA is a very broad and loose organisation that contains many different factions and organisations within it, some more moderate then others, and indeed some groups who were once under the FSA umbrella have since left and forged alliances with extremist groups.

I'll give you a hint: The US sends aid to the FSA. The FSA is a separate group from the ISIS. Not hard to understand.

That doesn't change the fact that such aid inevitably ends up in the hands of unintended groups. Of course the West knows this risk and does what it can to minimize it, but it knows full well that some of its aid will end up in the hands of groups like the ISIS.

[Vanoi]

That doesn't change the fact that such aid inevitably ends up in the hands of unintended groups. Of course the West knows this risk and does what it can to minimize it, but it knows full well that some of its aid will end up in the hands of groups like the ISIS.

Which isn't the point he was making at all. His point was the US directly aided the ISIS. Weapons ending up in tier hands is inevitable, and you may as well blame Russia and China too since i am sure the weapons they have sent have ended up in rebel hands.

[Celsius]

Show of hands of who prefers Saddam to Al-Qaeda!
*raises hand*

He may have been a typical middle eastern Dictator who occasional killed some of his own citizens, but at least the country was stable enough to hold onto its own cities.

[Farnan]

Show of hands of who prefers Saddam to Al-Qaeda!
*raises hand*

He may have been a typical middle eastern Dictator who occasional killed some of his own citizens, but at least the country was stable enough to hold onto its own cities.

Till he died.

[Vanoi]

I wouldn't say that. I wonder what would have happened to Iraq if Saddam was still in power and the Arab Spring hit?

[Heathen Hammer]

I wouldn't say that. I wonder what would have happened to Iraq if Saddam was still in power and the Arab Spring hit?

He'd become a "strategic asset" and a "valuable ally" again.

[Vanoi]

He'd become a "strategic asset" and a "valuable ally" again.

Like Gaddafi? Oh wait....

According to analysts, almost half of insurgents in Syria are jihadists.

Which isn't evidence for the US funding the ISIS.

US was also backing Saudis, who support islamists in Syria directly.

Lol. The US does not back Saudi interests in Syria. What the Saudis do is not controllable by the US. its why the US decided to arm the FSA and not the groups the Saudis were arming. I am still waiting for your source that the US directly supports the ISIS.

[Heathen Hammer]

Like Gaddafi? Oh wait....

That would imply Saddam wouldn't want to seize selling oil for $$, which was the reason why US attacked.

Which isn't evidence for the US funding the ISIS.

Of course, all the financing and material help coming from US to Syrian insurgents disappears when touched by an Islamist.

Lol. The US does not back Saudi interests in Syria. What the Saudis do is not controllable by the US. its why the US decided to arm the FSA and not the groups the Saudis were arming. I am still waiting for your source that the US directly supports the ISIS.

US was allied to Saudis, so yeah, they were supporting them indirectly, but it was still support. Support to same organizations, that organized a terrorist act that killed thousands of Americans.

[Vanoi]

That would imply Saddam wouldn't want to seize selling oil for $$, which was the reason why US attacked.

Source? A real once please, no conspiracy theories.

Of course, all the financing and material help coming from US to Syrian insurgents disappears when touched by an Islamist.

It doesn't, but that isn't the claim you made. You claimed the US directly supplied these Islamist and as i showed they do not. you may as well blame Russia and China too, as i am sure some of their weapons have ended up in the hands of Hezbollah or the Syrian islamists themselves.

US was allied to Saudis, so yeah, they were supporting them indirectly, but it was still support.

No again. Being allied doesn't mean you support your Allies's interests over your own.

Support to same organizations, that organized a terrorist act that killed thousands of Americans.

The Saudis don't fund the ISIS or Al-Qaeda. Do you know anything about the Syrian Civil War? The Saudis support their own brigades and Islamist groups.

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/Special/...4171381256329/