The battle for Mosul

[Peter1469]

[UncleRansom]

Specifics Pete. And I'm asking what you would do, I'm straight on your "but no" this or that. It will change over time of course, you flip flop like a Jimmy Buffett concert......but nevermind the shell hole that you once occupied on tpf, we're on another forum thanks to you.

What specifically......would you actually so.

Diplomacy? Who, what, where, how?

Shadow war doing what?

[Peter1469]

[UncleRansom]

I would not be opposed to Assad.

Then you'd not be opposed to Iran's expanded influence?

I would have eliminated Bankers that traffic ISIL money.

How do you do that. Oil sakes on the black market, funds stolen or outright overrun. Many facilitating ISIS Peter are from Turkey, it's government one of the primary 'bankers' and backers, please be specific as asked. What exactly does elimination mean? Kill? Remove from the planet?

I would keep the Arab tribes busy with trinkets.

And why they could be negotiated with by ISIS. Disenchanted and disenfranchised from the majority Shia government in Baghdad, Sunni tribal members in Iraq initially made alliances with ISIS rather than oppose them......just an example of how they're no longer interested in your trinkets, Peter, that clearly didn't work out just as your prediction didn't. They want support. Money. So they can purchase weapons.

I would not spend trillions as the Neocons have. That makes no sense. And this brings us back to constraints. Neocons don't understand that word.

Please be more specific, I've not heard any answers. We know what you wouldn't do, you're a great sewing machine, no one will argue that fact, your straw men legendary. This a new thread......please be specific. No need to add a neocon comment when it starts to so south, I'll repair the leaks.

Your Floor, Mr. Detail. "Eliminate" bankers. Give "trinkets" to Arab Tribes in Anbar for example?

[Peter1469]

[UncleRansom]

[Peter1469]

[UncleRansom]

[Peter1469]

1. My position about the bases remains the same. The disagreement that we always had was over governance of Iraq.
2. Incorrect. Until recently the Removal of Assad was a priority for the Administration. That has changed when the Russians can in to defend Assad. However, I don't believe that has changed the CIA's mind. They still want Assad gone. I have posted a couple of articles on that elsewhere.
3. If the head of Bank of America was facilitating the laundering and movement of jihadist money, he would be gone. I am not sure why you are asking for specific names. I don't have access to classified information relating to the topic. I am telling you policy.
4. I supported removing nation building.
5. Ends, contain the region. For the ways and means use our nation's resources wisely to obtain that end. Every tool at our disposal. It is much cheaper than "destroy IS." It is also achievable.
6. Americans are fed up with Neocon nation building. That is the reason you see these half-measures in Iraq and Syria today.

[UncleRansom]