General Chat

I think we may have seen this before once or twice.

It looks like America is preparing to send "military advisers" to Iraq.

Of course, this has nothing to do with attacks on oil refineries, does it?

I have been following the response of western politicians to events in Iraq as I remember when Blair took us to war in Iraq, it was based on the so called "dodgy dossier on weapons of mass destruction" that were a threat to the UK.

I wondered if the remarks by our Prime Minister David Cameron that if an extreme Islamic regime is created in Iraq it could not be ignored, as it would be a threat to the UK - was this from David Cameron's dodgy dossier to cover any intervention that we might be drawn into?

I'm sure we couldn't be drawn by other influential nations into any intervention.
Ever.
David Cameron can think for himself.
His advisers told him so.

I am no Militarian,
but I just cant understand why warring factions destroy(or try to) natural resources!
which at the end of the conflict will be their livelihoods......


I DO understand attacking enemy fuel dumps etc............but..........

But

I think ISIS are trying to sieze fuel installations as a means to taking control of the country.
Whoever controls the oil controls Iraq.

To understand ISIS it is essential to know that they are part of the Sunni Wahabi movement. The most well known regime under control of the Wahabis is Saudi Arabia. The Wahabis won power in 1923 under Ibn Saud defeating the Rashids who remain powerful in the eastern province (where the oil is ). It is not for nothing that the flag of Saudi is two crossed swords.

Despite the nonsense of the ayatollahs by and large the Shi'ites comprise the rather more reflective side of Islam.

Oil is not the objective of either side but rather something that happens to be there and can be used in a struggle going back over a thousand years. In the case of ISIS they may want to destroy the Bajii refinery as their objective is to get back to a fundamentalist world and removing oil for the west from the equation would ( to them ) be a good thing.

The Americans have rather late in the day discovered that they have been supporting the wrong team. Quite how Obama is going to carry out one of his "pivots" ( aka u-turn ) will be interesting.

There is nothing especially immoral in the west carrying out actions, including warfare, designed to allow trade, the lifeblood of western democracies, to carry on. That includes access to energy imports. However before carrying out any military action it is a good idea to check out which side you are on and the possible results of success / defeat.

In the current meltdown Obama is wise to refuse military support to Mr Malaki.

Iraq, Syria, Jordan, the Lebanon are artificial countries created by the British and the French when they carved up the Turkish empire after 1914. All of them ( plus Turkey ) have ended up with millions of people who have nothing at all in common and hate each other. The only durable solution is the redrawing of borders to reflect reality.

I have fairly good Arabic and some Farsi (Persian). I have lived for some time in Baghdad and Beirut as well as other parts of the region and fought in some of it. The ignorance displayed on US & British media and by our politicians eg Hague is astonishing.

http://www.iranonline.com/literature/hafez/one.html
<3