The battle for Mosul

For discussion on international politics and world affairs.
UncleRansom
Posts: 40
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2016 9:30 am
Location:
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 15 times

Re: The battle for Mosul

Postby UncleRansom » Sat Oct 29, 2016 12:34 pm

You are still promoting US presence in the form of two bases and heavy support from Persian Gulf forces, yes?

User avatar
Peter1469
Forum Framer
Posts: 948
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 5:19 pm
Location: NOVA
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 270 times
Been thanked: 168 times

Re: The battle for Mosul

Postby Peter1469 » Sat Oct 29, 2016 12:50 pm

It would be on the table. When I discussed it in the past it was in the context of doing something differently from the occupation. I am not opposed to using military force, but it should be tailored to what we can actually achieve.

Anyway, I expect the Iraqis would allow us the two bases that I mentioned. Balad air base, and Q-West airbase. They would be useful checks to Iranian power.

That does not address what the Iraqis will do to each other when the Islamic State is pushed out of Iraq. There is already evidence that Shia retaliated against at least some Sunni tribes. I don't think the US can unite them. At least not with the methods we tried in the past.

UncleRansom
Posts: 40
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2016 9:30 am
Location:
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 15 times

Re: The battle for Mosul

Postby UncleRansom » Sat Oct 29, 2016 5:20 pm

Peter1469 wrote:It would be on the table. When I discussed it in the past it was in the context of doing something differently from the occupation. I am not opposed to using military force, but it should be tailored to what we can actually achieve.

Anyway, I expect the Iraqis would allow us the two bases that I mentioned. Balad air base, and Q-West airbase. They would be useful checks to Iranian power.

That does not address what the Iraqis will do to each other when the Islamic State is pushed out of Iraq. There is already evidence that Shia retaliated against at least some Sunni tribes. I don't think the US can unite them. At least not with the methods we tried in the past.


It certainly should be on the table. Not only as a useful check against Iran, but against further extremist initiatives. In support of Iraqi military units against any such rebirth of ISIS. And now Peter....a useful check against the Russians who have moved in to Syria as well.

User avatar
Peter1469
Forum Framer
Posts: 948
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 5:19 pm
Location: NOVA
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 270 times
Been thanked: 168 times

Re: The battle for Mosul

Postby Peter1469 » Sat Oct 29, 2016 5:36 pm

We shouldn't be enemies with Russia over Syria. They dislike the Jihadists as much as we do.

UncleRansom
Posts: 40
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2016 9:30 am
Location:
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 15 times

Re: The battle for Mosul

Postby UncleRansom » Sat Oct 29, 2016 6:31 pm

Perhaps not Peter, but any future decision making or equations involved regarding Syria and Iraq will now have to factor in Russia. Syria already an Iranian proxy, we left gaping holes when we departed, an endeavor done for political purposes and against all military advice.

User avatar
Peter1469
Forum Framer
Posts: 948
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 5:19 pm
Location: NOVA
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 270 times
Been thanked: 168 times

Re: The battle for Mosul

Postby Peter1469 » Sat Oct 29, 2016 6:41 pm

Saddam was a check against Iranian power... But yes, Russia must be factored in.

Not only do they have their old navy base at Tartus, they now have at least one air force base that Syria is letting them use for free indefinitely.

Russian navy base

User avatar
Peter1469
Forum Framer
Posts: 948
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 5:19 pm
Location: NOVA
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 270 times
Been thanked: 168 times

Re: The battle for Mosul

Postby Peter1469 » Tue Nov 01, 2016 8:56 pm

Iraqi commandos have entered Mosul and seized a government building and a TV station.

Iraqi elite forces enter Mosul more than 2 years after Islamic State seized the city

Despite suicide attacks, snipers and roadside bombs, Iraqi commandos swept into the eastern edge of Mosul on Tuesday, setting foot in the city for the first time since it was seized by Islamic State militants more than two years ago.

It was a rapid and symbolic incursion into the northern Iraqi city at the heart of the militant group’s self-proclaimed “caliphate.” But bringing the fight into Mosul’s limits does not change the overall challenges facing Iraqi troops trying to oust the militants from their last major stronghold in Iraq. Ahead lie booby-trapped defense lines, networks of tunnels and neighborhoods packed with civilians.

Explosions and heavy exchanges of gunfire could be heard from Mosul’s Gogjali district as Iraq’s elite counterterrorism forces battled to retake it Tuesday. Jets streaked overhead.

UncleRansom
Posts: 40
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2016 9:30 am
Location:
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 15 times

Re: The battle for Mosul

Postby UncleRansom » Sat Nov 05, 2016 7:52 am

The Iraq government owes Mosul much, a massive infrastructure rebuild and security will have to be maintained.

What should US strategy be once the Islamic State is removed from Mosul?

UncleRansom
Posts: 40
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2016 9:30 am
Location:
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 15 times

Re: The battle for Mosul

Postby UncleRansom » Sat Nov 05, 2016 7:55 am

Peter1469 wrote:Saddam was a check against Iranian power... But yes, Russia must be factored in.

Not only do they have their old navy base at Tartus, they now have at least one air force base that Syria is letting them use for free indefinitely.

Russian navy base


Russia mostly involved in Europe and Asia, what brings them to the Middle East?

UncleRansom
Posts: 40
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2016 9:30 am
Location:
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 15 times

Re: The battle for Mosul

Postby UncleRansom » Sat Nov 05, 2016 8:05 am

Saddam checked Iranian power given the war between the two nations, that Saddam started by the way. However, he was a factor for the Mullah's remaining in power themselves. Iranian fear and hatred for the Iraqis a factor in the necessity of a large military and defense structure.

Thus imagine a Saddam Hussein still in power today....looking at an Iran that will soon have capabilities to develop nuclear weapons. Would he still be acting as a check? Push those realities out to their inevitable conclusions.


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests