Turkish troops cross into Syria; Iran launches military drill near Turkish border: reports

Given that Obama was in charge it's clear where the buck stops.

 

So what if they wanted that? Obama could just say no.

 

Obama didn't invade Iraq.. You do know that, don't you? Iraq was crippled by two decades of war and sanctions. Bush and the Neocons screwed up.

 

It was Obama who lost the war in Iraq by removing the forces in December, 2011. At that time there was relative peace and after that it quickly became a mess and we find ourselves where we are today.

 

He didn't have a choice.. He couldn't renege of Bush's SOFA agreement and Iraq had already been turned over to Maliki. That's REAL life.

It became a mess because we had destroyed all the institutions in Iraq and installed an Iranian stooge who abused the Sunni majority, Wake up.

 

Maliki should have been ignored. He was having to please several factions at the same time and tried to look tough.

Not all institutions were destroyed and those that were could have been rebuilt. That's what the people wanted, and they showed it by voting, but not what the Islamists wanted. Obama pleased the Islamists and since then there has been millions of deaths, genocide and continuous warfare.

 

Maliki was a putz.. Islamists? LOLOL.. Maliki ABUSED the Sunni population.. and the boys from Camp Bucca Prison were ready.

 

Exactly. So why should Obama follow his orders?

Someone was threatening and murdering the Iraqi citizens, including those trying to vote. What do you call them?

 

Ridiculous narrative. This is what posted elsewhere and it addresses the issues that Americans needs to know, including relating to Maliki, SOFA and the rise of ISIS.

The truth about "ISIS", and its links to US foreign policy and actions, are as follows.
1- Between 2004-2006, several Iraqi elections saw the "US list" lose to the "Iranian list". As a result, all sorts of voices blamed the Bush administration's invasion of Iraq and subsequent policies for "handing Iraq to Iran."
2- After the 2006 war between Israel and Hezbollah, alarm bells began ringing about a "Shia Crescent" led by Iran stretching from Iran through Iraq, through Syria, through Lebanon and to the Mediterranean. Both Sunni Arab states and Israel were behind much of the alarmist talk, which combined some facts with propaganda.
3- As a result, the Bush administration was persuaded to undergo a "Redirection" (a term from Seymour Hersh's article in the New Yorker at the time) of its foreign policy with an emphasis on fighting Iran everywhere "Iranian influence" was supposedly present. That meant particularly in Lebanon (Hezbollah), Iraq ('pro Iran' shia parties and miitia), Syria (Bashar Assad's regime), and ultimately in Iran itself.
4- The redirection was sold publicly as 'the surge'. Publicly, the surge was about the US working with Sunni tribal leaders to fight Al Queda in Iraq. In reality, it was mostly about the US -- through Sunni Arab conduits and intermediaries (including Iraqi tribal leaders with lots of Saudi money to throw around) -- bribing and inducing many of the former Al Queda forces (excepting their best known figures) to join a crusade against Iran/Shia and support a new Sunni force to be commanded by ex-Baathist Sunni officers. This force, of 100,000 men fully equipped and trained by the US, was known as the "Sons of Iraq".
5- Naturally, with much of the force behind the 'Sunni insurgency' which had previously fought the US now co-opted by the Americans, attacks by these forces against American targets reduced substantially. The 'surge' was, therefore, presented as a success.
6- In the meantime, however, these forces and their hatred was being directed towards a group they had hated all along: the Shia and Iran. Sunni politicians in Iraq, Arab Sunni tribal leaders, ex Baathist officers, Sunni Jihadists, and the Sons of Iraq -- all awash with Saudi and American money, equipment and training -- frightened America's own hand-picked Iraqi PM, Al-Maliki, who naturally saw these forces a danger to his government. Al Maliki, therefore, switched sides and came to rely on Iran to counterbalance these forces.
7- With Maliki switching sides, a cornerstone of Iranian policy - namely removal of US troops in Iraq -- became a demand of the Iraqi government in negotiating SOFA. And so did disbanding the "Sons of Iraq".
8- SOFA was negotiated by the Bush administration but implemented by the Obama administration, which kept a campaign promise to take US troops out of Iraq. With the Americans gone, and the Sons of Iraq disbanded, the same forces and the same money, training and equipment, found a new patron to fight the Shia and Iran (and, to a lesser extent, the Americans which had 'betrayed them'). That force became the Islamic State in Iraq and, once the other prong of the plans to destabilize and plunge Assad into civil war because of his ties to Iran went into full motion, this force then became ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria).
9- During the first few years of the "Syrian civil war", all these jihadist elements (including those who would be part of ISIS) were fully backed by the different foreign states trying to unseat Assad, including the US, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Qatar and even the EU. But in fairness, America and the EU dealt directly mostly with other elements in the anti-Assad coalition -- elements which had no real power on the ground but were more presentable as the 'public face' of the rebels fighting Assad to bring "democracy" to Syria (with such havens of democracy in the region as Saudi Arabia on their side. Eventually, as ISIS monstrosity became too much for anyone to handle, fighting the group became also part of the agenda in Syria and Iraq. (Even then, however, the Israelis were publicly saying they preferred ISIS to Iran on their borders).

 

Please learn some basic geography before you pontificate on geopolitics! Iran most certainly borders Turkey!

 

What you have said and are saying is nonsense. People with brains now why.

 

What history, and not the nonsense you have been raised on, teaches is that savages became civilized in the Middle East.

 

they had been wanting that every single time the sofa had to be renewed. It was nothing new. In the past though, the US had demanded it be renewed without the ability for Iraq to try US soldiers. Under Obama he didn’t try to renew it, he just used it as an excuse to leave because “Iraq didn’t want it”. It could have easily been renewed.

 

yes it could have. It had to be renewed and renegotiated multiple times, and Iraq always wanted the ability to try our soldiers in Iraqi court. That came up all the time while I was over there. ISIS came out of Obama’s retreat.

 

Maybe in the past. Not in recent history.

 

What are you talking about, confusing different issues? The last SOFA agreement explicitly provided that all US troops would be withdrawn from Iraq by 2011.

 

While Western civilization eventually surpassed the civilizations of the Middle East, especially after the 18th century, its greatest achievements go hand in hand with all sorts of real savagery that has been perpetuated by those who carry the mantle of Western civilization. Even today, much of that savagery (even when done in the name of people in the ME, e.g., of ISIS) is actually perpetuated by foreign agendas.

 

It is just a matter of time before the World is OUTRAGED by the Humanitarian Catastrophe.

And the Blood is 100% on Trump's Hands.

The Suffering of Innocent People CAUSED DIRECTLY by Trump.

A Very Sad Day to be an American.

Every day since Trump was Elected has been a Tragic Day for America.

But, the FACT that Trump has Greenlit the Genocide of the Kurds is particularly galling.:smh:

 

Yeah, like ISIS started under Obama, when all the evidence and facts identify them at 2004.

 

it was allowed to gain strength and momentum under Obama.

 

ISIS was there from 2004, it wasn't until a coalition of forces that drive them out. Your obtuse posts of always assigning blame to Obama is long in the tooth.

 

There was nothing there called ISIS in 2004. There were people in various insurgency organizations that would eventually join isis. The only reason isis was allowed to grow was because we left, thanks to Obama, leaving a vacuum that isis filled.

 

ISIS is a western term so your post is irrelevant. Try Daesh. They formed in Northern Iraq and comprised mainly from the higher ranks of Saddam's army and were the direct result of the US invasion in 2003 and formed shortly after. They formed straight after Bush threw them out onto the scrapheap.

 

Seriously, stop wasting my time, the fact it started in 2004 is well documented.

 

Now, if I could only understand what you posted ¯\_(º¸º)_/¯