Get PJ Media on your Apple

Belmont Club

On The Subject of Last Helicopters

June 13th, 2014 - 2:28 am

Contractors are being flown out Iraq, according to the Washington Post, to remove them from the line of advance of ISIS. The al-Qaeda affiliate is well known for its practice of decapitating captives, a practice which prompted a warning from Ayman Zawahiri. According to the Economist, Zawahiri felt the habit of posting such atrocities on video was giving al-Qaeda a bad name.

Although precautionary preparations have been made, the US embassy in Baghdad itself has not been evacuated. “The State Department said in January that it had about 5,000 personnel working at the embassy and at consulates in Basra and Irbil, including 2,000 Americans. Embassy personnel are protected by some 200 Marine Corps security guards.”

If the embassy is evacuated, it will leave what is perhaps one of the most lavish and expensive diplomatic facility in history in the hands of al-Qaeda. It contains what is probably a huge intelligence facility. “The 104-acre compound — already its biggest and most expensive in the world — currently houses 1,350 U.S. government employees in the heart of Baghdad’s International Zone and will increase its capacity because the U.S. is consolidating overall diplomatic property in Baghdad down by one-third. The most interesting upgrade is the construction of a data hall in an existing classified embassy annex building that will cost $20 to $35 million. It will require ‘electrical/telecommunication system upgrades [and] extensive mechanical and plumbing systems,’ according to a June 12 notice from the State Department.”

I hope they have the use enough C4 to leave not a stone on a stone

An edifice of proconsular magnificence, exuding the might and grandeur of America

The grandeur and magnificence of the Baghdad embassy has only been recently eclipsed in appointments by the new US embassy in London. The tendency of the Obama administration to build State Department palaces has been criticized.

The new embassy in London might have been meant to compensate for how badly American diplomacy has gone over the past decade or so, but spending hundreds of millions of dollars to make ourselves feel better is an expensive and ultimately useless exercise.

America will also be leaving behind a training effort “billed as the most ambitious American aid effort since the Marshall Plan — began in October and has already cost $500 million, including $343 million worth of construction projects around the country.”

If the embassy is evacuated as al-Qaeda reaches Baghdad the optics will be atrocious. The very magnificence of the buildings will underscore the magnitude of the defeat. The sheer size of the palaces will make destruction no easy task. For these grand edifices, constructed at so much taxpayer cost must be reduced to total ash by America’s own hand.  The taxpayer pays for the matches.

The tree girt gardens

The tree girt gardens

As the US embassy in Saigon prepared to be overrun the incinerators were filled to overflowing with US dollars and classified documents. Liquor stores were smashed. In the event there was not even enough time to destroy everything. Yet by comparison the US Embassy in Saigon is hovel compared to the facility in Baghdad.

North Vietnamese troops as well as intelligence and army officials scoured the abandoned Embassy shortly after taking Saigon on the afternoon of April 30. Over the next several days, they apparently were able to piece together classified documents that had been shredded but not burnt and used these to track down South Vietnamese employees of the Central Intelligence Agency.

In the event Baghdad is overrun, one can only hope the rear guard uses enough C4 to leave not a stone upon a stone.  And thermite where appropriate.   Until it’s gone. All gone.

But great though the loss of the buildings will be, the blow in terms of intelligence gathering capabilities, networks, facilities and dislocation will be monumental. No one knows how many translators, sub-agents and locals who have risked their lives for the US will be left twisting in the wind. It will be no easy task to thoroughly efface the work of years. Yet it will have to be done if al-Qaeda is not obtain the greatest intelligence windfall of its career. President Obama may find a way to screw that up too, for even to be properly defeated requires a competence he may lack.

Baghdad has not yet fallen. It may never fall. But prospect should make people sit up and wonder whether they understand the meaning of the word “defeat”. It’s not just a word or military phrase, but a condition of unutterable loss and subjection. It is humiliation distilled. It is total abjection.

President Obama grew up in a generation which cheered “defeats” as comically grainy events on black and white film which took place in far away places.  Perhaps it had for them a quality of unreality. Some prank on The Man, a something happening to someone else. Let’s see how they like it in HD.

Military age males being herded by ISIS to an unknown fate. Defeat is a b**ch.

Yet the loss in Iraq will be cheap at the price. It illustrates the ease with which the Obama administration can be surprised and reveals the utter hollowness of the men in the expensive suits. One day, perhaps soon, America may be challenged by an enemy which can truly hurt it — the Big One — and on that day Barack Hussein Obama is unlikely to fare any better than he has so far.

It’s not this present catastrophe that should worry everyone, though it is serious enough. It’s the what happens when Big One comes with the same in crew in charge that should give one pause.


Recent items of interest by Belmont readers based on Amazon click-throughs.

Shattered Sword: The Untold Story of the Battle of Midway
Syma S111G 3.5 Channel RC Helicopter with Gyro
Good Hunting: An American Spymaster’s Story
On the Psychology of Military Incompetence
The Forgotten Man Graphic Edition: A New History of the Great Depression
The Idiot Vote: The Democrats’ Core Constituency
Ear Wax Rmvl Syr
Storm Over The South China Sea
The War of the Words (The World of Information)


Did you know that you can purchase some of these books and pamphlets by Richard Fernandez and share them with you friends? They will receive a link in their email and it will automatically give them access to a Kindle reader on their smartphone, computer or even as a web-readable document.

The War of the Words for $3.99, Understanding the crisis of the early 21st century in terms of information corruption in the financial, security and political spheres
Rebranding Christianity for $3.99, or why the truth shall make you free
The Three Conjectures at Amazon Kindle for $1.99, reflections on terrorism and the nuclear age
Storming the Castle at Amazon Kindle for $3.99, why government should get small
No Way In at Amazon Kindle $8.95, print $9.99. Fiction. A flight into peril, flashbacks to underground action.
Storm Over the South China Sea $0.99, how China is restarting history in the Pacific
Tip Jar or Subscribe or Unsubscribe to the Belmont Club

Top Rated Comments   
Yes, Obama 'cares a great deal about his precious image' but in a strange way, he has no interest in what others think of him. That's because his image is self-created, self-organized, self-governed. If you don't accept this image of himself that he has authored, then, for Obama you, as an ignorant simpleton, simply cease to exist. He'll find other sycophants to cheer for him.

After all, Obama's thin red line in Syria faded when reality stepped in and Assad used chemical weapons. How did Obama deal with this? He claimed that the red line 'belonged to the world' not him, and he flung the requirement for action to someone else. Not him.

People aren't going to grill him on Iraq. After all, they've grilled him on Syria and he slithered out. They grilled him on 'you can keep your doctor' and he slithered out. In all cases, his claim is that YOU are the problem in misunderstanding him. And actually, he's right. You don't understand that his words do not have, and are not meant to have, any connection to reality. They are words, meant to cajole and charm you - but certainly, not to reflect and act within reality.

Obama is, as well, irritated by the demands of reality that he come up with a plan, that he take action. His domain is words-that-charm your emotions, not acts-that-affect-the real world. So, his irritation at demands that he 'do something' are first met by indifference, silence (and we've seen that in just about every crisis situation) and then, he makes an empty speech filled with great words, and fobs it all off to someone else: Biden, Rice, Clinton, Kerry...and he goes on a campaign and fundraising speech.

Obama will give a speech and do nothing. Just as with Syria, the Ukraine, Benhazi, the freedom fighters in Iran, Egypt, Keystone, IRS, HealthCare, illegals swarming across the border. Is he an empty chair? Yes, but even more, he's a record that plays and replays and plays...and that's all there is to him.


10 weeks ago
10 weeks ago Link To Comment
I don't think that the implosion of Iraq or the Middle East affects Obama's sense of himself as President nor does it 'tweak' any sense of his having any obligations to America or Americans. He doesn't function within those parameters.

I'll try to explain. What we have with Obama is a clinical narcissist, a pathological state where his only reality rests within Himself. He is unable to connect to the real world and to others. He exists solely within his own words - which is why he's great on the campaign trail - and a disaster in the work room. He psychologically requires that preaching platform where he pontificates pure unattached words to an adulatory cheering audience. That's all there is to him. Words within his own voice.

He can't connect to the real world and therefore is indifferent to the implosion of Iraq and the Middle East. It has nothing to do with him.

Whatever goes wrong is always, to Obama, someone else's fault. That's because his only reality is whatever he tells himself. His words. If the real world does things...which he hasn't talked about...then, for him, it is 'unreal'. He only exists within what he feels he can control and he has a great need to control - but - his control is confined to his words. - and his words are his only power. Again, that's why he can campaign but can't work.

So, he'll tell you that Obamacare won't cost a penny, that you can keep your doctor, and so on - and for him, that's the truth. The fact that this isn't the case; that reality is otherwise - that's your problem. He'll tell you that Al Qaeda is decimated and the reality that this is untrue - again, he has no interest in reality. He'll tell you that the Iraq war is won - and he has no interest in Iraq's implosion. Indeed, he is irritated at the real world for intruding on His Words.

That's why he loathes meetings, working with others on policies etc - he can't work with others for he can only 'speak' and not listen. And he's not interested in facts, in evidence. He just wants to talk and have you swoon over His Words. He loathes Congress because 'they' are speaking; because they are talking about facts; because they assume they have the right to make laws - and he can't consider others as equal to him.

Iraq? Obama doesn't care; he'll see the US embassy go up in flames and he'll blame it all on Bush for even going into Iraq. The rise of Al Qaeda, when he has assured us they are decimated? He has no interest in them because they are not submissive to him. For Obama, if you are not submissive, not adulatory - you literally cease to exist for him.
10 weeks ago
10 weeks ago Link To Comment
George Will points out that this is the foreign policy Obama promised and the American people voted for.

http://hotair.com/archives/2014/06/12/george-will-obama-is-in-fact-implementing-the-foreing-policy-he-promised/

They just never cast it in terms of defeat, only of withdrawl with a ritual hand washing. I'm sorry to say it, but this is what every American ally opted for after 1975. Just nobody thought it through.

What makes it worse is that very few can see that it is only just beginning.

My big concern at this juncture is that as the Bungler in Chief and his Leftist minions see it all unraveling both at home and abroad they will see their best hope of seizing total power and control slipping away and exercise a 'use it or lose it' policy. Having come so close to total victory, the prospect of spending more years gradually engineering the triumph of Socialism must have no appeal. They might just go ahead with a naked power grab using what they have figuring that it is better to make the wrong decision precipitously than make the perfect decision too late.

Their arrogance demands it.
10 weeks ago
10 weeks ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (184)
All Comments   (184)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
oh
9 weeks ago
9 weeks ago Link To Comment
Well, somebody has to post it, if only to lighten the mood!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a88Z7YOh_us
9 weeks ago
9 weeks ago Link To Comment
I see that we're sending a carrier to the gulf. I'd love to have seen the expression on the President's face when he asked the preverbial question, asked by Presidents for 70 years during any crisis:

Obama: "Where are the carriers?"
CNO: "In Norfolk and San Diego, Sir!"

Estimate to time on station? 2 weeks? That is, if they have the air wing embarked and aircraft parts and ammo inventory up to load out limits. I wonder how the training readiness hours have been running for the assigned pilots?

Then again, that was just a joke. I'm sure the only Obama asked about was the golf course start time availabilities ....
9 weeks ago
9 weeks ago Link To Comment
Oh, I'm pretty sure that he asked the question. However, his intent was to make sure that they were safely away from any possible action that might be in the interests of the United States.

Subotai Bahadur
9 weeks ago
9 weeks ago Link To Comment
"My God," said the carrier commander, reading the dispatch from the Pentagon, "...we've just been ordered to ram Easter Island!"
9 weeks ago
9 weeks ago Link To Comment
mistake
9 weeks ago
9 weeks ago Link To Comment
SandyDaze wrote"

"Below someone else mentioned the idea of outsourcing the defense. I am convinced that several thousand highly trained-to-western standards, men of the Woods and Dougherty capability, or approaching that, could be readily enlisted to the fight. Unconstrained by ROE which gave the benefit of the doubt to the enemy, and hoping to settle a few old-scores, I suspect that the ISIS/L would be rather surprised at the event.

This may be how the Crusades of the 21st Century will, necessarily, have to be fought. By Volunteers in volunteer armies. Meet the stateless ISIS/L with a stateless response."

A bit of American history may be of interest (pp. 154-155 This Glorious Cause
http://www.amazon.com/Glorious-Adventures-Company-Officers-Washingtons/dp/0691045674/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1402770121&sr=8-3&keywords=this+glorious+cause )

"The virtues of an armed, if untrained, citizenry were demonstrated in one final excursion to the field by the Middle Essex regiment. In the winter of 1786-1787, when civil processes in Western Massachusetts were threatened by several disorders described in history as Shay's Rebellion, Nathaniel Wade mustered his neighbors for a march to the Connecticut Rive Valley where insurgent forces had taken up arms in vigorous criticism of state officers and institutions....

The climax of the campaign came on the night of February 3-4 when General Lincoln marched his men thirty miles through a snowstorm from Hadley to Petersham for the surprise attack that destroyed organized resistance bands. Colonel Wade in later years described this march as the most difficult in his experience, exceeding in hardship any of his wartime adventures....

Instead of a battle, though, the morning ended in a rush by the insurgents to surrender --- throughout the campaign, in fact, the simple presence of militia columns seemed adequate to restore order...."

Of course, Colonel Wade was the same man whom General Washington put in command of West Point on the day Benedict Arnold defected, Sept 25 1780.

Contrary to the claims of Billary Clinton

CHARACTER MATTERS!


http://www.nytimes.com/books/first/s/shogan-sword.html

"If Bob Dole ever had a chance of winning the presidency of the United States, that opportunity came, and swiftly passed, during his first televised debate of the 1996 campaign against Bill Clinton. Did Dole believe, moderator Jim Lehrer asked midway through that confrontation, that there were relevant differences between him and Clinton "in the more personal areas"?

For a moment, anxious Democrats everywhere held their breath, while Republican pulses raced with joy. The "character issue," the jugular of Clinton's campaign, had been exposed, and Dole had been handed a dagger. He only needed to drive it home.

But Democrats need not have fretted. Dole had no such intention. "I don't like to get into personal matters," Dole said. "As far as I'm concerned, this is a campaign about issues." Scolded by his aides, Dole tried to revive the character issue in the second debate ten days later. But his scattershot sniping at the president failed to carry out its required objective of demonstrating Clinton's unfitness for the Oval Office. Despite a new wave of scandal besmirching Clinton's reputation in the closing days of the campaign, the outcome was never in doubt.

This lost opportunity underlines one of the profound conundrums of presidential politics made evident by Dole's frustration and Clinton's success. Franklin Roosevelt called the presidency "preeminently a place for moral leadership." Walter Dean Burnham describes our chief executives as "the high priests of the American civil religion." Moreover, political professionals in both parties are unanimous in their belief that in a political system where the significance of substantive campaign pledges has been diminished by the repeatedly demonstrated inability of politicians to redeem their promises, character is the bedrock issue in presidential elections.

Here then is the riddle: How did Clinton manage to defeat Dole when countless polls provided evidence for the intuitive judgment that the vast majority of the electorate viewed the incumbent as less honest, less trustworthy, less likely to stand by his convictions--in short, as a man of weaker character than his challenger?

The answer to this question leads to another riddle, and it was suggested to me by none other than Clinton himself. Early in the 1992 presidential campaign, when I had the chance to talk to then Governor Clinton one-on-one, I asked him whether he thought a candidate's personal behavior was a relevant guide to his performance as president.

"That is a question that every American has to answer for himself," he said. "But the question I would ask back is to what extent is that the real reason the press pursues these matters with such relentlessness?"

That was a typically shrewd response, intended to put the onus fo
9 weeks ago
9 weeks ago Link To Comment
I was watching O’Reilly last night. First Ed Henry was on and castigated O’Reilly for his talking points, saying that O’Reilly “was being too hard on the President.” Henry made a fool out of himself and looked like he still had Obama’s teat in his mouth. O’Reilly dealt with Henry “gently” where he should have bit*ch slapped him. Henry came off as Obama’s biggest booster. *Shakes Head* Next he had Fox’s converted Brit on – Stuart Varney. Varney offered that he felt that the wave of children coming across the border was totally contrived. “By whom?” O’Reilly asked. “By the Administration, of course, along with all the countries – Honduras through Mexico,” Varney offered. “Oh, no,” O’Reilly offered, “we can’t say that!” He went white with Varney’s honest and to-the-point answer – almost like Varney had uttered the “N” word. With Varney’s scolded eyes looking to the ground, O’Reilly went quickly to commercial.

Later, he was speaking to Geraldo, who blew into the President with caustic derision about how he was handling the present crisis in Iraq. O’Reilly’s admission, “Well, I blew this one, I just never saw it coming.” What immediately came to mind was the thought “You don’t even know the half of it.”

I’ve watched Brit Hume lately and he is shape-shifting before my very eyes; he is beginning to lose his usual grasp of reality and seems addled. His commentary on the children that are coming across the border focused on “how really beautiful they were and how they can really uplift the country in the future.” Bret Baier was almost speechless after that comment, but the veins were standing out on my forehead.

I think the miasma that is coming to America has eluded them – they continue to resist the pure reality of what becomes more evident every. single. day. These guys are supposed to be “in the know.” They are the “elites.” But the one thing that probably comes last to those that live in the bubble and consider themselves elite, is the fact that to accept the bulconguava and PC crapola (which is their coin of the realm), they also inure themselves from any other contradictory stimuli. For those of us in the proletariat of the middle class, the words “survival”, “truth”, “integrity”, “honor”, and “common sense” are words that if forgotten in flyover country, will get you fired or killed.

Those in the media cannot think about the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the Federalist Papers – those documents and the truths they contain are a timeless anathema to the ENFP types and the “conventional wisdom” pool in which they swim. Many of these folks are smart players – they wouldn’t be so successful if they weren’t. But they can be smart people in one venue and fools in another. They will continue to be fools when important things are ignored, until those unimportant “facts” gob smack them straight in the kisser.

They are and will continue to be blindsided by the one value their egos can’t comprehend: humility.

Today their tactical blind side is not only comprised by the "WHY" of the Urchins in Texas, Mexico and Arizona, nor their frustrated patience over the President’s inaction in the Middle East. No today's threat encompass an obvious, multi-front war that while they think the main threat is in the Middle East, they are being flanked by La Raza and MS13 through the Aztlán Corridor. “Look to the West, Grass hopper!”

MS13 beheads their adversaries, too.

And like the 9/11 attacker's buddies said shortly after 3,000 people died, "You ain't seen nothin' yet." BOHICA, America.
9 weeks ago
9 weeks ago Link To Comment
I stopped watching O'Reilly a long time ago. In short he is a populist Pied Piper of republican suicide.

As far as the illegals streaming across the border. See how that works. The political apparatus is built around murdering babies and replacing them with mestizos. Got that? Murder white and black children and replace them with foreign indios. The elites think that will be a neat trick, murdering the offspring of America to settle some psycho-karmic debt.

I wish someone could just spell it out. Secure the border or we are going to kill each and everyone of you plain and simple. There are 1 million armed gang members. What if we stopped paying taxes and instead paid them for the scalps of you and your children?

It may sound harsh but smarmy mouth principled liberals like O'reilly aren't going to get it until the SHTF. What do you do to a man who rapes a child? What do you do to the men who raped and strangled a nation and mother liberty? If the Nazi hunters could hunt down every Nazi the world over then the holocaust of a nation can be avenged anywhere in the world. The world is becoming a very dangerous place. Once you have broken the very laws that you were sworn to uphold then really anything goes and when it goes like that it goes ugly. Where will the elites run to? San Trope? I doubt Russia or China would offer them sanctuary. No, there will be nowhere to hide.

O'reilly wont get it until someone sticks a rusty screw driver in his eye and explains it with a pair of pliers and a blow torch. Then he'll understand.
9 weeks ago
9 weeks ago Link To Comment
I am recalling some cerain "sully" that would have fit your opinion
9 weeks ago
9 weeks ago Link To Comment
The Kurd annexation of Kirkuk is the final de facto settlement of Article 140 of the Iraqi Constitution.*

I do not understand the angst and hand-wringing over the Kurds taking Kirkuk. What--?--better to let it fall into the hands of ISIS/L ? Please.
If America has any friends in Iraq, it is with the Kurds. We should do everything possible to strengthen an alliance with the Kurds.

* http://www.kncna.org/docs/pdf_files/oleary_paper.pdf

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_140_of_the_Iraqi_Constitution
9 weeks ago
9 weeks ago Link To Comment
--the problem is Kurdistan incorporates part of Turkey (as well as Iran) and Turkey is the southern flank of NATO, gatekeeper of the Med/Black Sea choke point waterway, and is being woo'd hard away from NATO by Russia as well as Red Islam.
9 weeks ago
9 weeks ago Link To Comment
Not me...I kinda like what the Kurds are doing with the place. I'd like hangin' wit 'em too. At least they are constant and only shoot when attacked.

Well, mostly anyway.
9 weeks ago
9 weeks ago Link To Comment
KIRKUK, Iraq (AP) — After a decades-long dispute between Arabs and Kurds over the oil-rich northern Iraqi city of Kirkuk, it took just an hour and a half for its fate to be decided.

As al-Qaida-inspired militants advanced across northern Iraq and security forces melted away, Kurdish fighters who have long dominated Kirkuk ordered Iraqi troops out and seized full control of the regional oil hub and surrounding areas, according to a mid-ranking Army officer. He said he was told to surrender his weapons and leave his base.

His account was corroborated by an Arab tribal sheik and a photographer who witnessed the looting of army bases after troops left and who related similar accounts of the takeover from relatives in the army. All three spoke to The Associated Press Friday on condition of anonymity because they feared retribution from Kurdish forces.

"They said they would defend Kirkuk from the Islamic State," said the Arab officer, who oversaw a warehouse in the city's central military base. He asked that his rank not be made public.

He insisted the Iraqi troops had not planned to retreat before the Islamic state. "We were ready to battle to death. We were completely ready," he said at a roadside rest house just inside the semi-autonomous Kurdish region.

A spokesman for Kurdish forces, known as the peshmerga, said they had only moved in after Iraqi troops retreated, assuming control of the "majority of the Kurdistan region" outside the semi-autonomous Kurdish Regional Government.

"Peshmerga forces have helped Iraqi soldiers and military leaders when they abandoned their positions," including by helping three generals to fly back to Baghdad from the Kurdish regional capital Erbil, Lieutenant General Jabbar Yawar said in a statement on the regional government's website.

A lawmaker from Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's Shiite-led bloc condemned the peshmerga's move, calling it a "plot" carried out in coordination with the regional government that would "lead to problems."

"The Kurds have taken advantage of the current situation. They seized Kirkuk and they have other plans to swallow other areas," Mohammed Sadoun told The Associated Press.

By the way, now, IE8 works Okay on this website and Firefox has become unusable due to various scripts that interfere with it.
9 weeks ago
9 weeks ago Link To Comment
I'm using the current version of Firefox with the Ghosterly plug in and it's working fine. FWIW.
9 weeks ago
9 weeks ago Link To Comment
RW3,

Thanks for posting that article. Can you provide a link to it? I want to bookmark the site, if it's providing continuous info on events.
9 weeks ago
9 weeks ago Link To Comment
It's just an AP article that showed up on Earthlink's assortment of news. If you want to read the rest of it, just do a search for the title:

Kurds seize disputed oil hub amid Iraq chaos

Here is another one:

AP Analysis: Turmoil blurring Mideast borders
June 14, 2014 7:32 AM EST

CAIRO (AP) — Working in secret, European diplomats drew up the borders that have defined the Middle East's nations for nearly a century — but now civil war, sectarian bloodshed and leadership failures threaten to rip that map apart.

In the decades since independence, Arab governments have held these constructs together, in part by imposing an autocratic hand, despite the sometimes combustible mix of peoples within their borders. But recent history — particularly the three years of Arab Spring turmoil, has unleashed old allegiances and hatreds that run deep and cross borders. The animosity between Shiites and Sunnis, the rival branches of Islam, may be deepest of all.

The unrest is redefining Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Libya — nations born after the fall of the Ottoman Empire. Already quasi-states are forming.

For the al-Qaida breakaway group that overran parts of Iraq this week, the border between that country and Syria, where it is also fighting, may as well not even be there. The group, known as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, wants to establish a Shariah-ruled mini-state bridging both countries, in effect uniting a Sunni heartland across the center of the Mideast.

Other potential de facto states are easy to see on the horizon. A Kurdish one in northern Iraq — and perhaps another in northeast Syria. A rump Syrian state based around Damascus, neighboring cities and the Mediterranean coast, the heartland of President Bashar Assad's minority Alawite sect. A Shiite-dominated Iraq truncated to Baghdad and points south.
9 weeks ago
9 weeks ago Link To Comment
Just wait til the Shia sitting on Saudi Arabia's oil lands decide to join their Iraqi brethren.
9 weeks ago
9 weeks ago Link To Comment
Can anyone recommend a site that is offering continuous, up-to-date coverage of the Iraq situation? News, not analysis. My usual go-to places are letting me down. Thank you!
9 weeks ago
9 weeks ago Link To Comment

I regularly visit British online newspaper sites, the Telegraph and Daily Mail. They typically provide excellent, detailed coverage. I miss the presence of John Keegan at the Telegraph, however.
9 weeks ago
9 weeks ago Link To Comment
Thank you, Roughcoat. I'll try those.
9 weeks ago
9 weeks ago Link To Comment
Stop all your carping and complaining about our glorious Dear Leader. Here is just another one of his brilliant accomplishments achieved through the use of his undeniably brilliant smart power that only a multi-dimensional chess player like Buraq Hussein could master: ( From Breitbart )

"The Leader of ISIS Was Released by The Obama Administration. Abu Bakr al Baghdadi, leader of ISIS, was in US custody in Camp Bucca, in Iraq. He was released in 2009 when the US shut down the camp in anticipation of the end of US presence in the country."
9 weeks ago
9 weeks ago Link To Comment
The former commander of the Camp Bucca Prison, who is from NYC, was on the Kelly File (FOX News) last night. He said that during the handover to the Iraqis, Abu Bakr al Badhdadi turned to him and said, "I will see you in New York."
9 weeks ago
9 weeks ago Link To Comment
The former commander of the Camp Bucca Prison, whose home is NYC, was on the Kelly Files (FOX News) last night. He said that Abu Bakr al Baghdadi turned to him during the handover to the Iraqis and said, "I will see you in New York."
9 weeks ago
9 weeks ago Link To Comment
Oh sure, NOW you show up!
9 weeks ago
9 weeks ago Link To Comment
LMAO --yes the tricky little bastid got me last night --all the comments disappeared for a few hours --i was thinking about activating the hilltop redoubt for awhile there --
9 weeks ago
9 weeks ago Link To Comment
1 2 3 4 5 Next View All