Guys, I cannot see no international news in English about this and I had to post a yahoo link to another thread yesterday and today there is only a euronews and ı found a guardian link available. They are very short and numbers do not match with the news here. However this could also because they are not giving anything out?
And apparently they got Tikrit too.
First 31 truck drivers were kidnapped. News say they have sent word that they are not being treated but obviously their lives are in danger.
And then two days ago Turkish consulate was raided and people were taken hostage along with their families. Over it is reported that the hostage number is over 80. There is a call for NATO and other world leaders.
Iraq: Turkey vows ‘appropriate measures’ after Mosul consulate kidnappings:
http://www.euronews.com/2014/06/11/iraq-turkey-vows-appropriate-measures-after-mosul-consulate-kidnappings/
QuoteInsurgents in Iraq have reportedly kidnapped 48 Turks. The group of people, including three children and several members of Turkey’s special forces, were taken from the Turkish consulate in Mosul.
Turkish authorities have confirmed nobody in the group has been harmed.
Al-Qaeda offshoot the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) seized the country’s second-biggest city on Tuesday. Mosul is an important strategic location for ISIL: it is located on routes linking Iraq to Turkey and Syria.
Half a million people have fled towards the Kurdish city of Erbil to the north of Mosul.
Turkey’s interior minister Efkan Ala said that his country would react with “appropriate measures†to the news.
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has held an emergency meeting to discuss the latest developments.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/11/isis-militants-kidnap-turkish-diplomats-consulate-mosul-iraq
QuoteJihadists seized the Turkish consulate in the Iraqi city of Mosul and kidnapped the head of the diplomatic mission along with 24 staff members as residents fled the city in their thousands on Wednesday.
"Isil members managed to kidnap the Turkish consul and 24 of his guards and assistants," a police colonel told AFP, referring to the jihadist group the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, also known as Isis. The colonel said he had spoken with the kidnappers who said those held "are safe with us" and will be moved to a "safer place".
In a spectacular blow to Iraq's Shia-led government on Tuesday, Isis-led jihadists seized Mosul, its surrounding region of Nineveh and areas of Kirkuk and Salaheddin province. The assault by the group formerly known as al-Qaida in Iraq saw black banner-waving insurgents raid government buildings, push out security forces and capture military vehicles as residents fled from Iraq's second-largest city.
On Wednesday security officials said Isis fighters had also taken control of the Iraqi city of Tikrit â€" the home town of former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, less than 100 miles north of the capital, Baghdad.
The kidnappings of the diplomats came a day after Turkey's consulate in Mosul said Isis fighters had seized 28 Turkish truck drivers. Turkish forces have targeted Isis in Syria, and warned it against attacking a shrine in the northern province of Aleppo that is under Turkish jurisdiction. Isis is the most powerful militant group in Iraq, and a major force in the rebellion against President Bashar al-Assad in Syria.
On Wednesday morning several dozen Kurdish security force officers, both uniformed and plainclothed, manned a new checkpoint at Aski Kalak on the road between Mosul and the Irbil, the capital of Iraqi Kurdistan. More than a hundred cars â€" mostly with Nineveh number plates â€" had parked outside the checkpoint. Several dozen people, including pregnant women and children, queued in the heat to pass through the layers of security personnel.
A 36-year-old trader from Mosul who was waiting to be let through with a group of other men told the Guardian: "I think it will become like Syria because now the militants have entered the city the army will come and there will be war."
Atheel al-Nujaifi, the Ninevah provincial governor who has fled Mosul, said on Wednesday that Iraqi authorities are determined to recapture the northern city.
"Mosul is capable of getting back on its feet and getting rid of all the outsiders …and we have a plan to restore security," he said. "We have taken practical steps in order to restore order … by mobilising people into public committees that would retake the city."
Mosul, which before the exodus had a population of 1.5 million, is the capital of Ninevah, which along with the neighbouring Sunni-dominated Anbar province shares a long and porous border with Syria.
The takeover of Mosul prompted the US to voice deep concern about the situation, warning that Isis poses "a threat to the entire region".
There were no immediate estimates on how many people were killed in the assault but an estimated 500,000 people have already fled the city, according to the International Organisation for Migration.
Iraq's foreign minister, Hoshyar Zebari, said the seizure of Mosul must push the country's leaders towards working together to tackle the "serious, mortal threat" facing Iraq.
Zebari made his remarks on the sidelines of a meeting of European Union and Arab League foreign ministers in Athens. He said Iraqi troops and Kurdish forces in the country must join together to push the insurgents out of Mosul, though it was not clear what plans on co-operation â€" if any â€" were in the works.
"We can push back on the terrorists … and there would be a closer cooperation between Baghdad and the Kurdistan regional government to work together and try to flush out these foreign fighters or elements who have disturbed the safety, the wellbeing of the population," he said.
Residents in Mosul told reporters on Wednesday that gunmen had gone door to door, reassuring locals they would not be harmed and urging civil servants to return to work. The situation appeared calm but tense, said the residents, who spoke on condition of anonymity out of concerns for their safety.
In an eastern area of the city, 34-year-old Ali Sameer said mosques there were calling on people to return to work, especially those in public services.
Mosul's fall was a heavy defeat for the Iraqi prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, amid a widening insurgency by Isis.
The group has been advancing in both Iraq and neighbouring Syria, capturing territory in a campaign to set up a militant enclave straddling the border.
Maliki has pressed the Iraqi parliament to declare a state of emergency following the fall of Mosul.
Nujaifi accused senior security force commanders of providing Baghdad with false information about the situation in the city and demanding that they should stand trial.
Speaking from Irbil, he said smaller armed groups had joined Isis during the fight for control of Mosul.
Elsewhere in Iraq on Wednesday, at least four people were killed and 10 others injured by a car bombing targeting Shia pilgrims on their way to the holy city of Karbala. Police said another car bomb killed three people and wounded 12 in a town just south of Baghdad.
Medical officials confirmed the casualties for all attacks. All officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorised to speak to the media.
There is no guarantee they will be executed. Jihadists boasting on social media happens all the time, and I think ISIS will use these Turks as a bargaining chip either for ransom money or to get the Iraqi forces to withdraw from certain areas (they used that tactic in the 2003-2011 Iraq war).
Quite honestly, I can see the entire region engulfed in a low to high level conflict for the next few decades. The severity of the fighting would depend on the specific area, of course. Nobody is going to back down and there will be blood and destruction. That is the bold, honest truth.
There has been coverage here on the internet, but it is very light. I don't know if the TV Media has been following it or not. I knew Tikrit had been taken yesterday, but the brief article was more about Mosul, and the fall of Tikrit was mentioned in only in passing. I don't understand why this is being treated so lightly. After 10 or 12 years of watching every suicide bombing in Iraq, it's a mystery why such a major incursion is ignored. It's possible that the media didn't have its army of reporters in place, but I've always thought they could mobilize much faster and be on the scene overnight. What you are reading sounds pretty much the same as what we are getting here. It's like there is a natural blackout over the region.
The first word I had was from No-excuses reporting Facebook exchanges between Arabs in Mosul. I doubt that someone is trying to keep this hidden. It's just that Angelina Jolie seems to be losing a lot of weight, and Justin Beiber is being a jerk face again.
Over here we had it mentioned in the news, including the kidnapping of the Turkish nationals. Still, not much.
I don't really know what to think. The situation sounds out of control and I really don't see a solution, at least a short-term one. Each and every scenario I can think of will lead anyway to massive destruction and pain. It won't be pretty.
Quote from: drunkenshoe on June 12, 2014, 10:12:24 AM
Guys, may be you'll think I'm being the paranoid conspiracy nut as usual, but I think it is impossible for any major news agencies not having any info. There is basically nothing. I don't mean just about kidnappings either. Something very serious and big going on there and the available news sounds so weak. It's looks like it's done on purpose. Well we can't know why.
Correct me if I am wrong, but the region includes the most important oil fields on earth. How long it will stay under control of the government? This is not El-Queda before 9/11. And 430 million dollars is stolen from the banks by the way. Do you have any idea what can be accomplished with that little money there? It's scary.
I have to admit, it seems strange, even to the point of seeming fishy, but I'm more inclined to think the media is sleeping. Granted, I can think of reasons why both Democrats and Republicans in the US would like to avoid dealing with this right now, but if you are finding the same light coverage over there, it's probably not the doing of our government. I'm wondering what the Iraqi media coverage is like. It's telling that No-Excuses leaned about it on Facebook, rather than from a news paper. It seems more like a media vacuum in Iraq itself.
Also, I always wondered where all that cash in the Iraqi banks went during the first week of the invasion 12 years ago. I suspect it fell into the hands of the Sunni leadership. They would have known where it was and had the easiest access to it. They may have been waiting for the US to withdraw so they could take back control.
Informative links. Thanks.
When the US invaded Iraq, it was billed as an in and out quick and easy action. Invade, set up a democracy, and go home. I didn't buy it. I expected this thing to last through more than just the Bush administration, with each succeeding administration afraid to leave the country for fear of the political backlash that would follow the subsequent civil war that would come after the withdrawal. I didn't even expect Obama to pull out, but expected him to pass the problem on to the next administration. But the voters have lost their enthusiasm for war. Will they be able to whip up the same fever pitch of 2002? It's hard to tell. I suspect we will go back in, but not with the same fervor we did during the first invasion.
I also expect US coverage of Iraq's current situation to get better. It's unavoidable and can't be covered up.
NPR Radio is giving some more coverage. Apparently, a lot of people in Mosul don't like government control, which apparently they see as being heavy handed under the current Shite Iraqi leadership. This is the first I've heard of this. Did I hear it right?
However they are not fond of the insurgency either.
I'm seen a fair amount of coverage about it (but maybe I just watch better/more internationally minded news), but it does seem to be getting 1/3rd the coverage Cantor's defeat has been getting. I've heard a few people saying this is more proof that Obama is weak on terror and am waiting for that claim to really ramp up--never mind that Bush was the one to agree to withdraw and the only way the Iraqis would agree to an extension was to place US personnel under Iraqi law, 0 chance of that happening.
I'm afraid that the story here is going to turn into "this wouldn't have happened if we were still in Iraq" which is true, but misses the point. The real questions should be "how much longer would we have had to stay in Iraq for this not to have happened when we left". Obviously ISIS wasn't going to launch this type of out in the open major offensive with US army sitting there. They would have waited for the eventual withdrawal and then it still would have been up to Iraqi army and politicians--neither of which appear to have shown any modicum of competency and I don't think that would have changed with another year or five of American blood and treasure.
If we are going to get into hypotheticals we may as well ask what would have happened if the US military were still in Iraq and started taking fire from ISIS (or other groups) from within the Syria. Would they have been forced to pull back out of range? Fire into Syria; sent troops/air assets into Syria? Sounds like a really shit way to get drawn into that war as well.
An interesting article (http://www.vox.com/2014/6/12/5803416/isis-one-sentence-iraqi-army) with a one sentence explanation for the fall of Mosul
QuoteIraqi officials told the Guardian that two divisions of Iraqi soldiers - roughly 30,000 men - simply turned and ran in the face of the assault by an insurgent force of just 800 fighters.
That is not the type of problem that a little bit more training from Americans could have prevented.
How is it bigger than what I said? ISIS is interested in establishing a Caliphate all across the world, and they are on the path to doing that as we speak. They are the most powerful anti-gov group in Iraq. And yeah, the U.S. poked a hornet's nest by invading Iraq and unleashing all these armed groups.
If you want to know more about ISIS, look at their stuff on social media. They give daily, extremely detailed operational updates, photos, videos, interviews, etc. It's quite impressive. I go to them as a first source of information and then everything else is secondary after that.
Well let's reelect the chicken hawks and dump another few trillion or more dollars at it, draft poor kids to die from all around the world this time and make the richest people on the planet even richer because if we don't the rich won't want to be rich anymore and will take their riches to somewhere else... No wait! JESUS! Pray for Jesus!
I don't mean to sound flippant about this because it is serious, but fuck! It's like a fucking campaign poster here.
From what I can gather ISIS is made up of former Iraqi military who were disbanded by US policy after President "mission accomplished" fucked the pooch and left them all unemployed and disbanded the Bath government to install another puppet who couldn't get enough people together to play one man dog catcher in Maliki.
Quote from: Poison Tree on June 12, 2014, 01:50:43 PM
An interesting article (http://www.vox.com/2014/6/12/5803416/isis-one-sentence-iraqi-army) with a one sentence explanation for the fall of Mosul
QuoteIraqi officials told the Guardian that two divisions of Iraqi soldiers - roughly 30,000 men - simply turned and ran in the face of the assault by an insurgent force of just 800 fighters.
That is not the type of problem that a little bit more training from Americans could have prevented.
This is really bad. NPR mentioned the turning and running, but did not include the numbers. I had wondered if Iraqi forces were severely outnumbered or undisciplined and uncommitted. But a 40:1 advantage over the insurgence? My first reaction is to say the US needs to stay out of Iraq. It's a failed state, and that notion of freedom (ours, not Iraq's) isn't worth the price. They clearly have the resources to do their own fighting, but apparently not the will. I would be disappointed if we sent troops back. They don't want us there, and they apparently want what they had before. It would pouring in good money after bad.
But that's only my first reaction. There's bound to be a lot of information we don't have yet.
Go spend some time at the VA or any group of veterans and you might find one guy half heartedly want to go back, but that one guy will never have to go and his kids won't either. The fucked up part is to hear chicken hawk McCain talk millions are just dying to go kill kill kill so Iraqis will throw roses at their feet.
Quote from: SGOS on June 12, 2014, 02:37:13 PM
They clearly have the resources to do their own fighting, but apparently not the will.
It would pouring in good money after bad.
But that's only my first reaction. There's bound to be a lot of information we don't have yet.
Exactly. Broadly speaking there were always two options in Iraq: keep the US military there forever or leave eventually. I don't know of any serious person who suggested the first option (I know a couple of nuts who did), leaving only the second. If the Iraqis (and Afghans, come to mention it) are simply unwilling to handle their own problems then the time table to withdraw is basically irrelevant except with regard to how much money and how many lives it costs before its over. If it wasn't ISIS then it would have been al-Sadr or the Kurds or Iran or . . . who the Iraqi army would be refusing to fight.
Now, as you said, we don't know everything especially how this will play out in the end. Maybe the Iraqi army units in Mosul were just the bottom of the crap barrel and the rest will be willing and capable of fighting and drive back the ISIS with relative ease. But I'd certainly not count on it.
Well look, the US forced the Iraqi army to disband along with the ruling party leaving an untrained and largely unmotivated force while the real army was beaten down, refused work so they go and hook up with the opposition, the same people the US attacked and we wonder why they're such a fighting force. We left billions of dollars worth of war material behind and now apparently all of Bush's fuckups are the fault of Obama. That pretty much it up to now? I know there's more to it, but I'm not a war historian, but the Bush admin cut ALL these deals to get out and installed the puppet Maliki who is strictly sectarian and excluded everyone except his own cronies and thieves.
As I see it, there is one big instigator of this war and that is
:axe: Geeeee! Oh! Deeeeeee!:axe:
a purely faith based initiative
The very fact that there is a whole host of anti-gov groups fighting in Iraq is a worrying thing. I checked, and it seems that even old insurgent groups that disbanded after the U.S. occupation are back now. The insurgent advance continues in lightning speed, it's been like this for a few days now. Towns, cities, and military installations are falling like dominoes.
And no, the U.S. should not get involved. Have we not learned anything from this region? Maliki, just like Bashar Al Assad is a sectarian dictator that uses members of his own sect to prop up his own rule. In return, he showers his cronies with privilege and powerful positions. I absolutely, absolutely oppose bombing Iraqi insurgents just so the West can prop up the Shia Bloc that composes Maliki, Iran, Hezbollah and Assad. Not again.
It's a bit late now to say don't get involved. This is like the playground bully beating the fuck out of the little kid and a few years later the little kid grows to be a bigger bully and beats everyone else up so the first bully doesn't want to get involved in cleaning up the mess of the monster he created when he beat the fuck out of the little kid who became a monster. It's damned if you do and damned if you don't for Obama because the right wing talking head machine is in full finger pointing and history revisionist mode. I truly hope people vote with their children's lives instead of some nationalist bullshit lie the rw chicken hawks want to sell.
Well, apparently Iran is sending in Quds Force from the Iranian Revolutionary Guards (http://www.vox.com/2014/6/12/5804184/iran-deployed-troops-iran-isis) to help fight ISIS. In the short term this should help stiffen the Iraqi army but it risks further inflaming Shia-Sunni hatred and is more evidence that the major result for the US invasion of Iraq has been to strengthen Iran.
Iran the great Satan...err..boogie man.. I've known quite a few Iranians over the years and found them quite nice folks. I have no beef with them. I did share French fries with one once though.
Shoe, I hope Turkiye doesn't get dragged into the meat grinder that is Iraq.
Anyone remember when we trained and armed the military, like a million and a half of them, of a country called Viet Nam? What did those "soldiers" do when the North came marching in? Dropped their weapons, shed their uniforms, and ran. It will happen in Afghanistan too, when the time comes, just like Iraq.
Democratic Iraq was always some talking point cover story. I don't think anyone except perhaps the extreme naive ever believed that nonsense.
Quote from: drunkenshoe on June 13, 2014, 07:47:43 AM
When I said it's bigger than before, I meant they are operating far different than other terrorists groups back before the invasions. They gained two other cities and they will get in Bagdat and invade everywhere they can.
And do you really think that they will be left to get control of the oil fields or the area. This has nothing about the failing of the Iraqi state or whatever. What is worth or not worth the price for US? A democratic Iraq? You are kidding, right? Are you still there?
Nope, Iraq has never been democratic as long as I've been alive. There was a bill in parliament to address the Sunni issues, Maliki and his Shia coalition crushed it under the orders of their Iranian masters. Some general reforms, a degree of autonomy, and recognizing Sunnis as human beings with rights would have stopped this crisis before it had any chance of getting started.
Quote from: drunkenshoe on June 13, 2014, 03:25:41 PM
Oi, frosty! Sarcasm. Making fun of American international policy, if you will.
A degree of autonomy, some general reforms...some islamic sect recognising some another as humans, aw. Before even the 'first world' can, no less. Oh Yeah, because the sect conflicts started just a decade ago and if they could have been stopped just like that, if it wasn't for those Iranian masters, things would change asap. (Sarcasm) By the way, in what year of the 21st century you learned to type the name of these sects again? (Not as in spelling, as in knowing about them)
I keep forgetting your capacity.
Iranian masters! :doh:
I have no interest in getting involved in a sarcastic forum battle of the wits. Maybe you do, but that's your prerogative. Have fun replying to this.
And what you think of my capacity is of really no interest to me, perhaps people on the forum wouldn't think of you in such crusty terms if you didn't act the way you did. Think about it :)
Quote from: drunkenshoe on June 13, 2014, 03:39:54 PM
which is...?
So I tell you what it is, you give me insults and a general sassy attitude back, then nothing changes. If by this point you don't know what it is then there's no point in me telling you. Of course I'm not always the greatest person but I don't try to push off my problems and negative attitude on other undeserving people.
If only you could act like a proper helpless wallflower and leave the manly thinking to the manly men because Jesus thinks it's a good idea er something like that. :lol:
You know it's unmanly to have a feminine type make a manly man look as if a feminine type knows more. It's a direct threat to penilinity. For shame! :eek:
And DON'T ask me to explain things that make utterly no sense whatsoever. It's unmanly!
John McCain is demanding Obama fire his foreign policy team and we go back to never ending war because the MEGATERRORISTSâ,,¢ might do something bad someday!
Ok., McCain is officially insane now.
Quote from: AllPurposeAtheist on June 13, 2014, 05:28:15 PM
John McCain is demanding Obama fire his foreign policy team and we go back to never ending war because the MEGATERRORISTSâ,,¢ might do something bad someday!
Ok., McCain is officially insane now.
McCain needs to fuck himself. The rest of us are not obligated to entertain him just because he sat out his big chance in a prison camp.
Quote from: drunkenshoe on June 13, 2014, 04:54:04 PM
You need to work harder if you desire a real insult. If you paid attention and managed to get down from your embarrassing high horse, may be there could be a real conversation. But then aren't you the one who 'blamed' me with 'flaunting my femininity around the forum' ? Zzzzz.
Thanks for proving me right, keep complaining in the chat box about how people don't like you. You're on an embarrassing high horse yourself, enjoy getting suspended again you stupid stuck up twat. Don't randomly dish out insults for no reason and then complain like a little bitch when you get it back!! zzzzzzzz
Quote from: AllPurposeAtheist on June 13, 2014, 05:12:06 PM
If only you could act like a proper helpless wallflower and leave the manly thinking to the manly men because Jesus thinks it's a good idea er something like that. :lol:
You know it's unmanly to have a feminine type make a manly man look as if a feminine type knows more. It's a direct threat to penilinity. For shame! :eek:
And DON'T ask me to explain things that make utterly no sense whatsoever. It's unmanly!
Yeah, your last sentence is the only thing that made sense. I was the one that got insulted first for no reason, and as for that comment about feminity, I made it like 6 months ago in a completely unrelated thread. Drunkenshoe holds Internet grudges me thinks. Oh, and don't kid yourself, nobody is making me look "less manly" or whatever drunken spew you're dribbling. This is not about looking manly or feminine, it's about someone with their own problems randomly insulting me when I'm trying to contribute to the forum. I will gladly be banned before I capitulate to being abused for speaking my mind freely. Anyone of YOU would stand up for yourself in the exact same way, so fuck you and have a GREAT day :)
And I don't get what you are talking about "Jesus" for, considering I have 438 posts of me being a proven Atheist. I think you need some type of help.
So I guess I'll come back later, check the replies, and see a bunch of posts talking about gender and me following "Jesus"? In b4 it happenZ.
Grow up frosty and get over yourself.
Quote from: AllPurposeAtheist on June 14, 2014, 07:49:18 PM
Grow up frosty and get over yourself.
It's already happened. I really don't know what else to say, this is like the pot calling the kettle black. I was taking part in a decent conversation, I got randomly insulted, I reacted. If you can't take the heat you are welcome to leave the kitchen, based on your reply you already have.
Next time shut your fucking mouth and don't say anything in the first place if you don't want me to reply back and contradict you. I'm the one being mature here, you tried to insult me in a group dynamic and it failed miserably.
When it comes between getting my ass kicked by everyone on a forum or blindly licking feet, I'll gladly get my ass kicked every single time.
There is now a reasonable amount of coverage on Iraq in the US. NPR does a pretty good job. I suspect the television media is mostly reporting talking heads placing blame on Bush and/or Obama. While this doesn't necessarily help people understand what is actually happening, at least it gives them a reason to be mad at the opposing party. In all, there was only a 4 or 5 day lag between it happening and it being presented by the news. I've seen much longer lag times.
What I find most interesting was the lack of coverage leading up to the insurgency. News outlets just lost interest in Iraq, but what is coming out now is how brutal, heavy handed, and one sided the new "democratic" government became once it had consolidated a bit of power. Supposedly, this helped open the door for the rebels. And until now, there had not been a word of the incompetence of the Iraqi armed forces. It seems it's within the capability of the US to force regime change, even kill a foreign leader, but changing the way a society wants to govern itself is a task much too large for our armed forces and well meaning politicians.
I think the real reason for invading Iraq had more to do with transferring tax dollars to the Military Industrial Complex, rather than "freeing the Iraqi people," and in that regard, that's probably what Bush really meant by "Mission accomplished."
People may want to disregard the comments of Bradley Manning, who is now in jail for uncovering government secrets, but he was in a position where he had access to those secrets, and spilling those to the public got him into jail. Yet these current comments from his jail cell seem timely.
http://news.yahoo.com/manning-says-us-public-lied-iraq-start-030349079.html
QuoteWhile the US military was upbeat in its public outlook on the 2010 Iraqi parliamentary elections, suggesting it had helped bring stability and democracy to the country, "those of us stationed there were acutely aware of a more complicated reality," Manning wrote.
"Military and diplomatic reports coming across my desk detailed a brutal crackdown against political dissidents by the Iraqi Ministry of Interior and federal police, on behalf of Prime Minister Nuri Al-Maliki. Detainees were often tortured, or even killed."
Manning, a former US Army intelligence analyst, said he was "shocked by our military's complicity in the corruption of that election. Yet these deeply troubling details flew under the American media's radar."
Criticizing the military's practice of embedding journalists, Manning charged that "the current limits on press freedom and excessive government secrecy make it impossible for Americans to grasp fully what is happening in the wars we finance."