New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Where the hell is the so-called "Iraqi army"?

And the oilmen sure got lucky - the prez and Veep were both fellow oilmen.

Not luck really - oil money got them installed - but you know what I mean.

;-)

The thing is, the oilmen got what they wanted, continued reliance on fossil fuels for the foreseeable future. Their campaign was brilliant though extremely cynical, relying on the national trauma of 9/11 to advance false justifications for war.

However, the scheme seems to be falling apart now, and the oil isn't being pumped from Iraq like it should. Cue the neocons....
 
We gave the Iraqis plenty of weapons--too many. Now a lot of them belong to ISIS.

And about ISIS being our proxy, do you even know what a proxy is?

If we have a proxy, it would be the Kurds though there is a chance we'll eventually cooperate to some extent with Iran, though who would be the proxy in that relationship escapes me.

Who gave then to ISIS? They were from all accounts simply handed over - No the Iraqis are owed weapons that have not been delivered - All in their Parliament, their Government were asking for them at the time - I posted it then. they could not fight your mercenary Army (terrorists) because they were not supposed to -

This is a dirty dirty game the US is playing - it will back fire -
 
Who gave then to ISIS? They were from all accounts simply handed over - No the Iraqis are owed weapons that have not been delivered - All in their Parliament, their Government were asking for them at the time - I posted it then. they could not fight your mercenary Army (terrorists) because they were not supposed to -

This is a dirty dirty game the US is playing - it will back fire -

The Iraqi Army fled even though it outnumbered ISIS considerably and had recourse to American armor and heavy weapons.

So ISIS decided to take possession of the armor and weapons along with the terrain.

That you think the US is allied with ISIS is remarkable, but perhaps it should be expected from someone who relies on RT for news.
 
The Iraqi Army fled even though it outnumbered ISIS considerably and had recourse to American armor and heavy weapons.

So ISIS decided to take possession of the armor and weapons along with the terrain.

That you think the US is allied with ISIS is remarkable, but perhaps it should be expected from someone who relies on RT for news.

So you were told - that is not though how it happened. There was a peaceful hand over - arranged and peaceful - by the accounts of people who saw it happen -

The US is not allied with ISIS it invented ISIS -

wow up I have been saying this long long before the RT article - which I read this morning.
 
Bush had the war won, turns it over to Obama who claims he won the war and pulls all the troops out, bragging the whole time that he wanted all the troops gone sooner. This whole thing is an example of how an idiot like obama can snatch defeat from victory. The man doesn't now what he is doing and is clueless. I count the days until goat boy leaves office.
 
So you were told - that is not though how it happened. There was a peaceful hand over - arranged and peaceful - by the accounts of people who saw it happen -

Perhaps I should resort to evidence:

Iraq is facing its gravest test since the US-led invasion more than a decade ago, after its army capitulated to Islamist insurgents who have seized four cities and pillaged military bases and banks, in a lightning campaign which seems poised to fuel a cross-border insurgency endangering the entire region.

The extent of the Iraqi army’s defeat at the hands of militants from the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (Isis) became clear yesterday when officials in Baghdad conceded that insurgents had stripped the main army base in the northern city of Mosul of weapons, released hundreds of prisoners from the city’s jails and may have seized up to $480 million in banknotes from the city’s banks.

Iraqi officials said 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. Isis extremists roamed freely yesterday through the streets of Mosul, openly surprised at the ease with which they had taken Iraq’s second largest city after three days of sporadic fighting.
​

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/worl...es-to-isis-militants-in-four-cities-1.1828973

The US is not allied with ISIS it invented ISIS -

wow up I have been saying this long long before the RT article - which I read this morning.

It was because Obama is a Muslim fascist with communist tendencies no doubt. Of course he couldn't come out with his scheme to the public, but it was masterful. First, he had to arm the Iraqi Army to the hilt and make sure it tilted Shia, the easy part, then he had to convince the Iraqi Army to abandon its American weapons to its sworn enemies, the impossible part.

The only question remaining is a reason why Obama would do such a thing, but Muslim fascists with communist tendencies are remarkably capricious, so reason doesn't even have to exist.
 
Last edited:
Perhaps I should resort to evidence:

Iraq is facing its gravest test since the US-led invasion more than a decade ago, after its army capitulated to Islamist insurgents who have seized four cities and pillaged military bases and banks, in a lightning campaign which seems poised to fuel a cross-border insurgency endangering the entire region.

The extent of the Iraqi army’s defeat at the hands of militants from the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (Isis) became clear yesterday when officials in Baghdad conceded that insurgents had stripped the main army base in the northern city of Mosul of weapons, released hundreds of prisoners from the city’s jails and may have seized up to $480 million in banknotes from the city’s banks.

Iraqi officials said 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. Isis extremists roamed freely yesterday through the streets of Mosul, openly surprised at the ease with which they had taken Iraq’s second largest city after three days of sporadic fighting.
​

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/worl...es-to-isis-militants-in-four-cities-1.1828973



It was because Obama is a Muslim fascist with communist tendencies no doubt. Of course he couldn't come out with his scheme to the public, but it was masterful. First, he had to arm the Iraqi Army to the hilt and make sure it tilted Shia, the easy part, then he had to convince the Iraqi Army to abandon it's American weapons to its sworn enemies, the impossible part.

The only question remaining is the reason, but Muslim fascists with communist tendencies are remarkably capricious, so reason doesn't even have to exist.


What are you quoting from? What is their proof? they just report what all the rest report -

The USA first armed the Mujahideen ( we shall by pass the Taliban) = Al Qaida.

They moved them to Chechnya to disrupt Russia - then Chechens moved to Syria (oh and not to forget poor poor Libya but there first were the Egyptian thugs) who have now moved to Iraq - Syrians were saying all along that the 'freedom fighters/rebels were Chechen.

All this is traceable all this is verifiable - I am too tired to do such a long stint tonight though - It is a dirty and very dangerous game -
 
You destroyed the Army - And have not delivered the weapons needed - all paid for in full.

They have no weapons to fight with America - why won't you deliver those they have bought from you?

Russia has offered them weapons now - maybe this is the proxi US vs Russian War about to kick off because ISIS/L is your proxi military -

The Iraqi army has no shortage of weapons. What they lack is motivation to fight for the Maliki government.
 
What are you quoting from? What is their proof? they just report what all the rest report -

The USA first armed the Mujahideen ( we shall by pass the Taliban) = Al Qaida.

They moved them to Chechnya to disrupt Russia - then Chechens moved to Syria (oh and not to forget poor poor Libya but there first were the Egyptian thugs) who have now moved to Iraq - Syrians were saying all along that the 'freedom fighters/rebels were Chechen.

All this is traceable all this is verifiable - I am too tired to do such a long stint tonight though - It is a dirty and very dangerous game -

I'm quoting the Irish Times. I left a link. I can find many other sources, but I figured the Irish Times would be sufficiently removed to suffer less bias.

The US has no control over Al Qaeda or ISIS and never has. Even when the Mujaheddeen were armed by the US, the US still had no control over them.
 
The Iraqi army has no shortage of weapons. What they lack is motivation to fight for the Maliki government.

Bull sh'it they are sending them to the Kurds instead - now I have no problem with the Kurds - but honestly you do not know what you are doing or who you are dealing with - if it were not so terrible, it would be funny -
 
I cannot.

I think it was the worst foreign policy blunder ever, and nothing else comes close.

That's why Pugs insanely try to blame it on Obama.

;-)
Viet Nam doesn't come close?

Casualties:
Hostile deaths: 47,359

Non-hostile deaths: 10,797

Total: 58,156 (including men formerly classified as MIA and Mayaguez casualties).

Highest state death rate: West Virginia--84.1. (The national average death rate for males in 1970 was 58.9 per 100,000).

WIA: 303,704 - 153,329 required hospitalization, 50,375 who did not.

Severely disabled: 75,000, 23,214 were classified 100% disabled. 5,283 lost
limbs, 1,081 sustained multiple amputations. Amputation or crippling wounds to the lower extremities were 300% higher than in WWII and 70% higher than in Korea. Multiple amputations occurred at the rate of 18.4% compared to 5.7% in WWII.

MIA: 2,338

POW: 766, of whom 114 died in captivity.

Draftees vs. volunteers: 25% (648,500) of total forces in country were draftees. (66% of U.S. armed forces members were drafted during WWII)
Draftees accounted for 30.4% (17,725) of combat deaths in Vietnam.

Reservists KIA: 5,977

National Guard: 6,140 served; 101 died.


http://www.mrfa.org/vnstats.htm
 
Bull sh'it they are sending them to the Kurds instead - now I have no problem with the Kurds - but honestly you do not know what you are doing or who you are dealing with - if it were not so terrible, it would be funny -

So we are sending weapons to Sunni ISIS and the Kurds, but not sending any to the Iraqi Army whom we may as well call the Shia.

Fascinating.
 
Viet Nam doesn't come close?

Casualties:
Hostile deaths: 47,359

Non-hostile deaths: 10,797

Total: 58,156 (including men formerly classified as MIA and Mayaguez casualties).

Highest state death rate: West Virginia--84.1. (The national average death rate for males in 1970 was 58.9 per 100,000).

WIA: 303,704 - 153,329 required hospitalization, 50,375 who did not.

Severely disabled: 75,000, 23,214 were classified 100% disabled. 5,283 lost
limbs, 1,081 sustained multiple amputations. Amputation or crippling wounds to the lower extremities were 300% higher than in WWII and 70% higher than in Korea. Multiple amputations occurred at the rate of 18.4% compared to 5.7% in WWII.

MIA: 2,338

POW: 766, of whom 114 died in captivity.

Draftees vs. volunteers: 25% (648,500) of total forces in country were draftees. (66% of U.S. armed forces members were drafted during WWII)
Draftees accounted for 30.4% (17,725) of combat deaths in Vietnam.

Reservists KIA: 5,977

National Guard: 6,140 served; 101 died.


http://www.mrfa.org/vnstats.htm

A lot of North and South Vietnamese civilians also lost their lives.

The problem is, the conflict in Southeast Asia is long over while the one in the Middle-east is just getting going.
 
So we are sending weapons to Sunni ISIS and the Kurds, but not sending any to the Iraqi Army whom we may as well call the Shia.

Fascinating.

It doesn't look like it does it? - You have the Oil fields now in your hands, so you think, and cut out Iraq - at the same time the old Silk Roads are being opened up - we shall see, we shall see.
 
I'm quoting the Irish Times. I left a link. I can find many other sources, but I figured the Irish Times would be sufficiently removed to suffer less bias.

The US has no control over Al Qaeda or ISIS and never has. Even when the Mujaheddeen were armed by the US, the US still had no control over them.

I know who you were quoting :) but their sources are just the same as all Western News sources, since real journalists were killed off or frightened off by the USA there are few honest sources -
 
What are you quoting from? What is their proof? they just report what all the rest report -

The USA first armed the Mujahideen ( we shall by pass the Taliban) = Al Qaida.

They moved them to Chechnya to disrupt Russia - then Chechens moved to Syria (oh and not to forget poor poor Libya but there first were the Egyptian thugs) who have now moved to Iraq - Syrians were saying all along that the 'freedom fighters/rebels were Chechen.

All this is traceable all this is verifiable - I am too tired to do such a long stint tonight though - It is a dirty and very dangerous game -

Funny...you ask for proof and yet you have none of your allegations.
The US didn't create ISIS....it was the combination of Al Qaeda in Iraq and an anti-Assad group in Syria.

We didn't create Al Qaeda. It was a creation of Bin Laden and Zawahiri.

Your conspiracy theories are idiotic.
 
Back
Top