2020 US/Iranian Crisis

[Double Edge]

Seeing that the Iraqi Parliament to throw out all US troops it would fair to say that Trumpkin has blown that one.

It's a non-binding resolution urging the caretaker iraqi PM who is under pressure from Iran to rescind the invitation extended after IS overran a third of the country back in 2014

Iraqis were unable to prevent Iran's militas from firing at american bases

Could not stop IS, can not stop Iran but want US to leave ? hehe

Kurds & Sunni lawmakers boycotted the session so that tells you they want the US present as a counterweight to Iran.

Still a quorum was had to pass the resolution.

A symbolic one

[Officer of Engineers]

Some here create History as it has never happened. Apart from creative writing, however, the decision of Iraqi parliament to kick out US troops from the country is just about the reality and future, We should focus on. Soleimani has just started to achieve one of his goals as a result of Trump's decision to kill him. Any forward imagination of what may come after Trump decides to strike against Iranian territory? More realistic, please, not as the historical fantasy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bJpQqcuyvQ

I lived that history. I was on the wall while you were in diapers.

You, however, is showing your ignorance to the hilt. And in case you're mistaken here. I'm not American. I'm Canadian and by "we", I mean the Western alliance and more specifically the British and French Empire pre-WWII and the US post-WWII.

And you do know that Sunnis and Kurds did not vote; making it an irrevelent resolution.

[Officer of Engineers]

The Inspector General of the Bundeswehr has suspended the rotation of fresh German troops into Iraq based on that, originally planned for next week. No decision yet on whether to withdraw the troops present there now.

Everything is screwed up. As of two days ago. All NATO/UN troops have withdrawn into compounds. However, as I understand it, the training is standing down.

But frankly, it's freaking time to get the hell out of there. Enough of the handholding. It's not our country nor our ally to protect. The US left them with a standing army capable of stopping anything in the region ... and they couldn't hold a city against a 300 man bn. We left them in good shape. They screwed it up and begged us to come back in. Wev'e done our part again and it is freaking time to leave.

And I have a freaking problem with the Iraqis lending M1 tanks to Qud forces, making their military agreements completely worthless.

[Double Edge]

Yeah, I supposed you would have love the Soviets to be in charge of Mideast Oil instead of the West.

So there is a curious story about that. But long story short it was Stalin that screwed up Soviet relations with the Saudis as early as 1937

Personal relations matter a great deal with Arabs : )

[Double Edge]

https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/01/03...sh-deterrence/

After months of a muted U.S. response to Tehran’s repeated lashing out—the downing of a U.S. military drone, a devastating attack on Saudi oil infrastructure, and more—Suleimani’s killing was designed to send a pointed message to the regime that the United States will not tolerate continued provocation, he said.

^this

He's done the same with FONOPS in the SCS

FP: Do you think the decision to conduct this attack on Iraqi soil was overly provocative?

DP: Again what was the alternative? Do it in Iran? Think of the implications of that. This is the most formidable adversary that we have faced for decades. He is a combination of CIA director, JSOC [Joint Special Operations Command] commander, and special presidential envoy for the region. This is a very significant effort to reestablish deterrence, which obviously had not been shored up by the relatively insignificant responses up until now.

Doing it in a 3rd country is better

India did this 3rd country picking a fight thing in 2017 : )

FP: Given the maximum pressure campaign that has crippled its economy, the designation of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist organization, and now this assassination, what incentive does Iran have to negotiate now?

DP: The incentive would be to get out from under the sanctions, which are crippling. Could we get back to the Iran nuclear deal plus some additional actions that could address the shortcomings of the agreement?

This is a very significant escalation, and they don’t know where this goes any more than anyone else does. Yes, they can respond and they can retaliate, and that can lead to further retaliation—and that it is clear now that the administration is willing to take very substantial action. This is a pretty clarifying moment in that regard.

Yep

FP: Will the Iraqi government kick the U.S. military out of Iraq?

DP: The prime minister has said that he would put forward legislation to do that, although I don’t think that the majority of Iraqi leaders want to see that given that ISIS is still a significant threat. They are keenly aware that it was not the Iranian supported militias that defeated the Islamic State, it was U.S.-enabled Iraqi armed forces and special forces that really fought the decisive battles.

Interesting, i've heard the opposite

[Officer of Engineers]

So there is a curious story about that. But long story short it was Stalin that screwed up Soviet relations with the Saudis as early as 1937

Personal relations matter a great deal with Arabs : )

You're talking about a kingdom who still make deals with countries selling/supplying arms to their "mortal enemy" Israel and who have whole Pakistani regts in their service. The KSA have several hundred Chinese IRBMs manned by Chinese engineers, sworned enemies to Islam during Mao's China.

Whatever damage Stalin had done has long been ecilipsed by other events that soured Russian-KSA relationship.

[m a x]

I call again to all participants here to focus on the topic. After the killing of gen. Soleimani, Iran and USA are already in a state of direct, hot war. Anyone see the end of it /?/

[Officer of Engineers]

Interesting, i've heard the opposite

Only Iraqi government forces, read NATO SOF, were able to co-ordinate with Coalition airpower in Isolation and Reduction actions.

[Officer of Engineers]

I call again to all participants here to focus on the topic. After the killing of gen. Soleimani, Iran and USA are already in a state of direct, hot war. Anyone see the end of it /?/

There is NO WAR. Neither Tehran nor Washington DC has Declared War. Frankly, if it came to war, Tehran would be up in smoke in a matter of hours. What you have RIGHT NOW is a LOW INTENSITY conflict.

[m a x]

There is NO WAR. Neither Tehran nor Washington DC has Declared War. ... What you have RIGHT NOW is a LOW INTENSITY conflict.

Trump administration is unlikely to declare it either by attacking dozens of Iranian targets. Measuring the intensity is descriptive

[TopHatter]

Iraq votes to expel U.S. troops after Iran Gen. Qasem Soleimani's killing

In a sign of Iraq's mounting anger over a U.S. drone attack that killed Iran's top general, Qasem Soleimani, as well as an Iraqi leader of Tehran-backed militias, Iraq's Parliament on Sunday voted to expel U.S. military forces from the country.

The development came as Iran said it was all but abandoning the nuclear deal between Tehran and world powers that the Trump administration exited in May 2018. Since the U.S. withdrawal from the accord, tensions with Iran have steadily increased.

Iraq's Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi told lawmakers that a timetable for the withdrawal of all foreign troops, including U.S. ones, was required "for the sake of our national sovereignty." About 5,000 American troops are in various parts of Iraq.

Mahdi described the strike authorized by President Donald Trump as a "political assassination" and said it was "time for American troops to leave."

Iran official on Soleimani killing:'The response for a military action is military action'

The resolution was supported by a majority of about 180 lawmakers present in Parliament, according to Iraqi media. It was backed by most Shiite members of parliament, who hold a majority of seats. Many Sunni and Kurdish legislators did not show up for the session, likely because they oppose the initiative.

Tensions rising
The vote came two days after Soleimani was killed inside Iraq, dramatically ratcheting up tensions between Washington, and Tehran and Baghdad. It was not immediately clear to what extent the resolution would be implemented. It is nonbinding. The resolution specifically calls for ending an agreement in which Washington sent troops to Iraq more than four years ago to help in the fight against the Islamic State group.

Ahead of the vote, U.S.-led coalition forces battling the remnants of the Islamic State group in Iraq and Syria announced a "pause" in operations precipitated by the need to protect U.S. and coalition troops on bases in Iraq. Iran's leadership has vowed revenge for Soleimani's killing and signaled it may target U.S. military personnel in the region.

Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has threatened "severe revenge."
_________

Looks to be mostly symbolic...I think the Iraqi Parliament knows where their national security comes from.

[ambidex]

She is technically correct, no doubt irking for you. It is also a war crime to attack 'cultural sites' not to mention totally counter serving and a waste of time. Doing so is only going to make the population more supportive of the regime and your time and munitions would be better used taking out nuclear facilities.

Hu....Talk by people who were defending Nagasaki and Hiroshima which did not even discriminate between 'blade of grass' and a 'lawnmower' but killed everything; a few years back on this very forum.

Cultural site or not the message of deterrence using counter value strike has been conveyed. I do not see if there can be any distinction made if the warning given is of a counter strike or counter value significance. Last time Bush warned Sadam Hussain of Nuclear strikes and I know for sure Iraq has many cultural sites.

[Officer of Engineers]

Trump administration is unlikely to declare it either by attacking dozens of Iranian targets. Measuring the intensity is descriptive

Regardless. A State Of War does not currently exist and will not likely to exist.

There are NO Iranian street protests. Most likely because Tehran does not trust such protests will not turn out to be a full blown uprising given what happened during 2019 protests. It is extemely TELLING that Tehran does NOT trust her own people in protesting this attack.

Combat intensity has very specific meanings to military men. It let us know what kind of firepower and manpower is committed to the fight. Neither Tehran nor Washington has yet to commit more than a few missiles and upto coy- worth of men to this fight. This is at best a skirmish and nowhere close to being a war - yet.

[Officer of Engineers]

No one is yet chanting "Death to the US" on Iranian Streets.

[m a x]

Again, We are not discussing the formality, but the reality of situation. There have been multiple accusations that the war is going on for long time through proxies. Trump has decided to turn it into a direct military conflict. The already started transportation of American forces because of this motion is visible through the media. And again, the point is not about current intensity, but of what is coming over, after triggering of the announced plans for rocket strikes against Iranian assets on Iranian territory