LucidElement Posted August 14, 2014 #1 Share Posted August 14, 2014 Maliki, Prime Minister of Iraq has just announced he will step down to a new Prime Minister. What will this mean for Iraq and ISIS? New leadership, any chance of turning it around or is ISIS spread way to much... maybe the new PM can figure out or has a new gameplan? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Space Commander Travis Posted August 14, 2014 #2 Share Posted August 14, 2014 Whoever would want to take over from him? Or will ol' Bagdadi just save a lot of everyone's time and put himself forward and be done with it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+and-then Posted August 14, 2014 #3 Share Posted August 14, 2014 It was implied that the US might more forcefully intervene on behalf of Iraq if Maliki were gone. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LucidElement Posted August 15, 2014 Author #4 Share Posted August 15, 2014 Maliki was part of the issue that ISIS started. Maliki didn't want any Sunni's or Kurds into his government. It upset everyone. this new Prime Minister Al-Abadi has a new take on how the country will try to be ran, (so i've hard). Also heard that U.S will work with Abadi to help establish peace or more organization.. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spartan max2 Posted August 15, 2014 #5 Share Posted August 15, 2014 I really hope the new PM actually is a visionary and can see the potential his people have if they have a strong leader to follow Orrrr he will just be one of the usual SOB in the region 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+and-then Posted August 15, 2014 #6 Share Posted August 15, 2014 I really hope the new PM actually is a visionary and can see the potential his people have if they have a strong leader to follow Orrrr he will just be one of the usual SOB in the region I think they have named a Kurd. He is bound to be better than Maliki. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashotep Posted August 16, 2014 #7 Share Posted August 16, 2014 (edited) I think Haidar al-Abadi is a Shiite. It would be nice if he were Kurd, they seem to be the only ones really fighting ISIS. Hopefully this man will run a more inclusive government. Lack of such is partly why ISIS was able to take over so easily. That and Iraq's military sucked. http://www.firstpost.com/world/iraq-unrest-stubborn-al-maliki-resists-being-replaced-as-pm-1660123.html Edited August 16, 2014 by Ashotep 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+and-then Posted August 16, 2014 #8 Share Posted August 16, 2014 I think Haidar al-Abadi is a Shiite. It would be nice if he were Kurd, they seem to be the only ones really fighting ISIS. Hopefully this man will run a more inclusive government. Lack of such is partly why ISIS was able to take over so easily. That and Iraq's military sucked. http://www.firstpost...pm-1660123.html Thanks for the correction Ashotep. I'm not sure where I read he was a Kurd but apparently I misunderstood. Now it makes more sense that Iran would be supportive of him. I wondered why they would have embraced a Kurd. They have no love lost between them. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acidhead Posted August 16, 2014 #9 Share Posted August 16, 2014 Also heard that U.S will work with Abadi to help establish peace or more organization.. Thats a comforting thought. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+and-then Posted August 16, 2014 #10 Share Posted August 16, 2014 Thats a comforting thought. As opposed to what alternative? Nice snarky little comment, but not very practical or humane really. America SCREWED UP on Iraq. Now our fine friends around the globe can stand back and point the finger and FOREVER tell us how evil we are. Until, of course, they need us again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earl.Of.Trumps Posted August 19, 2014 #11 Share Posted August 19, 2014 I think acid head makes a good point. The US has no real interest in helping Iraq, only to run Iraq. The proof is in the pudding, do you think that American involvement in taking out Saddam helped the Iraq people? The biggest no-brainer I ever asked lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yamato Posted August 21, 2014 #12 Share Posted August 21, 2014 Dr. Haider al-Malidi is an Engineer who learned his craft in England. If only the US had engineers running for highest offices instead of lawyers. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+and-then Posted August 22, 2014 #13 Share Posted August 22, 2014 I think acid head makes a good point. The US has no real interest in helping Iraq, only to run Iraq. The proof is in the pudding, do you think that American involvement in taking out Saddam helped the Iraq people? The biggest no-brainer I ever asked lol I'm not sure how a western mindset could have really understood the potential chaos that would be unleashed by removing the "lid" from such a contained evil. Now that we do understand, we have tired of trying to re-contain it. Problem is that we now have no real choice. We will either destroy IT or it will destroy US. This danger isn't about numbers any longer, Earl... it's about a flashpoint of ideologies that is primed for a massive explosion. Nothing less than a modern version of the Crusades - and Jerusalem is at the heart of it all again. Only the Grail this time for the west is oil - not religion. But for the Muslims it is still about religion. That does not bode well at all for us in the west. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acidhead Posted August 22, 2014 #14 Share Posted August 22, 2014 Don't know how any western mindset could have understood the potential chaos by invading Iraq in 2003? Ron Paul predicted the ensuing chaos! WATCH THE FOLOWING VIDEO: Ron Paul discusses the Iraq War and his litmus test for war. Ron Paul on C-SPAN: Feb. 6, 2003 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+and-then Posted August 22, 2014 #15 Share Posted August 22, 2014 Don't know how any western mindset could have understood the potential chaos by invading Iraq in 2003? Ron Paul predicted the ensuing chaos! WATCH THE FOLOWING VIDEO: Ron Paul discusses the Iraq War and his litmus test for war. Ron Paul on C-SPAN: Feb. 6, 2003 [media=] [/media] Hardly... I'll admit that he was more prescient than those making the policies at the time, but not even he understood just how tangled it all was PRIOR to the troops going in. The current conflict is about a fringe of violent observers of Islam. Anyone who believes otherwise is, imo, deluding themselves. One can sit back and take shots at the leadership, vilifying them for decisions made but the current reality is pretty darned grim and "I told you so" really doesn't matter, you know? When these animals begin to filter back to their respective countries we are going to start to see mayhem at home. And the ones who I feel badly for are those Muslims who are genuinely peaceful. They are going to catch hell in small (and not so small) towns all over this country the next time we have a 9-11 style event. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acidhead Posted August 22, 2014 #16 Share Posted August 22, 2014 (edited) Hardly? @1:45 Ron Paul says, "If we do nothing are we that much worse off? And I can't see where we are. We are just stirring up a hornets nest." Edited August 22, 2014 by acidhead Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+and-then Posted August 22, 2014 #17 Share Posted August 22, 2014 Hardly? @1:45 Ron Paul says, "If we do nothing are we that much worse off? And I can't see where we are. We are just stirring up a hornets nest." Okay, if that seems like he understood the depth of it all to you then I can't argue the point. But my guess is that the man was just pushing his own line about generally staying out of entanglements. That isn't quite the same to me as really understanding the dynamics of the situation. In the end it doesn't matter now. The west is committed to fight this evil or be consumed by it. Complaining about who lit the match isn't doing anything to put out the fire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yamato Posted August 22, 2014 #18 Share Posted August 22, 2014 Okay, if that seems like he understood the depth of it all to you then I can't argue the point. But my guess is that the man was just pushing his own line about generally staying out of entanglements. That isn't quite the same to me as really understanding the dynamics of the situation. In the end it doesn't matter now. The west is committed to fight this evil or be consumed by it. Complaining about who lit the match isn't doing anything to put out the fire. Acidhead is simply saying that Ron Paul understood one very important dynamic of the situation that few others did. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yamato Posted August 22, 2014 #19 Share Posted August 22, 2014 Hardly... I'll admit that he was more prescient than those making the policies at the time, but not even he understood just how tangled it all was PRIOR to the troops going in. The current conflict is about a fringe of violent observers of Islam. Anyone who believes otherwise is, imo, deluding themselves. One can sit back and take shots at the leadership, vilifying them for decisions made but the current reality is pretty darned grim and "I told you so" really doesn't matter, you know? When these animals begin to filter back to their respective countries we are going to start to see mayhem at home. And the ones who I feel badly for are those Muslims who are genuinely peaceful. They are going to catch hell in small (and not so small) towns all over this country the next time we have a 9-11 style event. If Saddam Hussein was still in charge this wouldn't be happening. Ron Paul is a prophet compared with his peers. Given Barack Obama's extreme militancy since he's been in office, I won't be surprised if we hear about numerous attempted terrorist attacks on our country in the next 10 years. We just don't know how to leave well enough alone. Saddam Hussein was our bud when he was invading Iran. This monkey business of a policy is all about politics not principle. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now