US, UK ignored strong intelligence on ISIS

[Clocker]

ERBIL, Iraq — For months before the fall of Mosul, Iraq’s second-largest city, Washington and London were getting detailed warnings about jihadist plans to exploit Sunni resentment toward Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and launch an ambitious takeover of northern and western Iraq.

Kurdish military sources say the strategy of the ultra-radical Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) was telegraphed long in advance. The Kurds, who have their own autonomous region in northern Iraq and their own armed forces, monitored developing ties between the jihadists and tribal leaders as well as growing contacts with former Iraqi military officers.

The Kurds became especially alarmed at signs that ISIS had already formed a shadow government in Mosul, weeks before initiating the carefully planned takeover of the city 10 days ago. According to the same Kurdish military sources it was accomplished with ease and without serious fighting after local Iraqi commanders agreed to withdraw.

The prime minister of the semi-autonomous Kurdistan region, Nechirvan Barzani, says he warned Baghdad and the United States months ago about the threat ISIS posed to Iraq and the group’s plan to launch an insurgency across Iraq. The Kurds even offered to participate in a joint military operation with Baghdad against the jihadists.

Washington didn’t respond—a claim that will fuel Republican charges that the Obama administration has been dangerously disengaged from the Middle East. Iraqi Prime Minister al-Maliki dismissed the warnings, saying everything was under control.

The Kurds’ intelligence head, Lahur Talabani, says he handed Washington and London detailed reports about the unfolding threat. The warnings “fell on deaf ears,” he says.



Story here. (http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/06/24/washington-and-london-ignored-warnings-about-the-isis-offensive-in-iraq.html)

[Tom]

We had an excuse - we had emails to deal with.:rolleyes:

[Robert Goren]

So what! Nobody but a few right wing hawks want to go back into that Hell hole. There is no reason for us to make it easy for them to kill Americans by sending troops back in.

[Clocker]

So what! Nobody but a few right wing hawks want to go back into that Hell hole. There is no reason for us to make it easy for them to kill Americans by sending troops back in.

So what is that Obama thinks that he is a world leader and Kerry thinks that he is the Great Compromiser, and they feel compelled to give the world the benefit of their talents.

So what is that they ignored all information and don't have a clue as to what to do, but feel compelled to do something to show their expertise. If they had listened to the Kurds, who offered to help, they might have been ready to deal with this, or even have nipped it in the bud.

But now Obama is floundering, and talking about sending in military advisers. Which, as we all remember, worked out well in Nam.

[PaceAdvantage]

So what! Nobody but a few right wing hawks want to go back into that Hell hole. There is no reason for us to make it easy for them to kill Americans by sending troops back in.I don't see how we can sit by idly while this ragtag group overruns the country.

Say what you will about Bush being wrong about going into Iraq, we broke it, we bought it. To completely allow all the blood and money shed over Iraq to go down the drain because of this relatively small group? Wow...can't believe this might happen.

To allow this group to strengthen and eventually take control of Iraq may be the gravest foreign policy blunder ever made....with serious implications for the entire world, not just that region.

[Clocker]

I'm guessing this thing just got broke again. If we did have hard intelligence months ago, and had listened to it, we might have been able to do something, with the Iraq government and army taking the lead. Like taking out the ISIS bases in Syria. That's just a wild-ass guess on my part.

But now ISIS has tons of military gear that the Iraq army left behind, they have billions of dollars looted from banks, and they are established in friendly territory, the Sunni areas that did not like Maliki and his Shiite government.

And the Kurds are happy as clams with the Iraq government and the ISIS out of their territory, which includes the northern oil fields. It is going to be very hard to put that toothpaste back in the tube.

[johnhannibalsmith]

People aren't interested in abstract possibilities and this is a political hand grenade without the pin and no hands to even hold it. If there was ever to be even an iota of public support (here and elsewhere) for more interest in that region, it would have to be after they could televise a bunch of guys that look like Osama bin Laden doing wacky militant stuff that would scare us into possibly opting to do what might be construed by the public at large as the lesser of two evils. That or we should have just staged a mass kidnapping of school girls to turn all the isolationists into temporary interventionists.

[PaceAdvantage]

Screw public and world opinion. Often times, we have to go it alone...but not anymore I suppose.

I'm not sure what Obama expects will come of doing nothing and eventually letting this ISIS or ISIL or whatever they want to be called take over Iraq. Do they think this would be a net-positive for the region and US interests?

Or does Obama want Iraq to completely fail so that they can simply blame it on Bush? :bang: :lol: I wouldn't put it past him...

[Tom]

Don't we arm the ISIS groups in Syria?

[johnhannibalsmith]

You can't fight on that sort of stage and be removed from public opinion and its effect and influence. Too many political opportunists that are looking out for themselves ready to capitalize on public opinion.

[PaceAdvantage]

Don't we arm the ISIS groups in Syria?Wouldn't surprise me...

[FantasticDan]

Again, the US left Iraq with an overwhelming army of 250,000 that we spent many years training and equipping. ISIS should have been crushed immediately and with little effort, but the sectarian forces splintered leadership and the army's willingness to fight.

I haven't seen one respectable source claim that anyone "knew" such a thing was going to happen.

[Sapio]

Story here. (http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/06/24/washington-and-london-ignored-warnings-about-the-isis-offensive-in-iraq.html)

Seriously, you can't blame Obama.
It wasn't in the papers for him to read it or on TV for him to see it.

Thomas Sapio

[Robert Goren]

Why should we try to prop up a pro Iranian government? There is not two cents worth of difference between ISIS and the Iraqi government in power now.

[Clocker]

I haven't seen one respectable source claim that anyone "knew" such a thing was going to happen.

The White House knew it in 1991, when the US drove Iraq out of Kuwait as easily as ISIS is driving the Iraq army out of central Iraq today. President George H. W. Bush was heavily criticized for not carrying the attack all the way to Baghdad and taking down the Saddam regime.

A major reason for not invading Iraq was that Bush and his advisers knew that Saddam was the force that was holding Iraq together, and that if he was gone, the country would collapse into sectarian violence. Bush the Elder and his people knew that they could not control a virtual civil war, and left Saddam in place as the lesser of two evils.

Bush the Younger, not learning his lessons at the knee of his father, invaded Iraq, took down Saddam, and the country collapsed into sectarian violence. At great cost of blood and treasure, we pacified the country and propped up a patchwork government weakly disguised as a democracy.

Obama, not learning the lessons of either Bush, pulled out the props and went home. The result is deja vu all over again. The outcome was predictable.

Obama knew in 2011 and knows now what the problems are. He has stated it in speeches then and now: lack of an internal political solution in Iraq, due mainly to an inability to overcome sectarian differences. Obama is now implying that Maliki should work out those little differences if he wants our help. A good excuse to sit back and do nothing while the country implodes.

[JustRalph]

Again, the US left Iraq with an overwhelming army of 250,000 that we spent many years training and equipping. ISIS should have been crushed immediately and with little effort, but the sectarian forces splintered leadership and the army's willingness to fight.

I haven't seen one respectable source claim that anyone "knew" such a thing was going to happen.

How about the generals who warned of it?

[Tom]

Again, the US left Iraq with an overwhelming army of 250,000 that we spent many years training and equipping. ISIS should have been crushed immediately and with little effort, but the sectarian forces splintered leadership and the army's willingness to fight.

I haven't seen one respectable source claim that anyone "knew" such a thing was going to happen.

Some one apparently did.
ERBIL, Iraq — For months before the fall of Mosul, Iraq’s second-largest city, Washington and London were getting detailed warnings about jihadist plans to exploit Sunni resentment toward Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and launch an ambitious takeover of northern and western Iraq.

[JustRalph]

How about the generals who warned of it?

I'll quote myself to further the point via Woodward

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2014/06/22/Bob-Woodward-The-Generals-Were-On-Their-Knees-Begging-Obama-to-Keep-Some-Troops-In-Iraq

Hello?

[Robert Goren]

I'll quote myself to further the point via Woodward

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2014/06/22/Bob-Woodward-The-Generals-Were-On-Their-Knees-Begging-Obama-to-Keep-Some-Troops-In-Iraq

Hello?All that would done is give the Westboro Baptist Church more funerals to protest at.

[Greyfox]

There is no reason for us to make it easy for them to kill Americans by sending troops back in.

I agree Robert. :ThmbUp:

The Iraqi Government has a standing army of 250,000 soldiers, trained by America, along with planes and tanks.

The ISIS fighters have no access to tanks and number 7,000.

If Maliki's army can't or won't fend them off, it tells you something about what his own troops think of him and his government.

[Clocker]

The ISIS fighters have no access to tanks and number 7,000.


As the Iraqi army is driven off, ISIS fighters are capturing huge stores (http://www.news.com.au/world/iraqi-sunni-insurgents-seize-huge-cache-of-usmade-arms-and-equipment/story-fndir2ev-1226952811362) of military equipment, including tanks, Humvees, and other weapons. Reports are that they are using some, and sending the rest (http://www.ibtimes.co.in/isis-takes-dozens-captured-us-humvees-tanks-syria-iraq-602939) back to their bases in Syria.

THE fall of the city of Mosul to Iraqi militants has landed them a deadly windfall — a massive cache of US-supplied weapons including vehicles, tanks and helicopters.

The Iraq government forces abandoned their arms and ammunition as they fled the horde of Sunni gunmen streaming into the war-torn nation’s second largest city earlier this week.

Most of that equipment was supplied by the United States.

[Greyfox]

As the Iraqi army is driven off, ISIS fighters are capturing huge stores (http://www.news.com.au/world/iraqi-sunni-insurgents-seize-huge-cache-of-usmade-arms-and-equipment/story-fndir2ev-1226952811362) of military equipment, including tanks, Humvees, and other weapons. Reports are that they are using some, and sending the rest (http://www.ibtimes.co.in/isis-takes-dozens-captured-us-humvees-tanks-syria-iraq-602939) back to their bases in Syria.

Yup. They've got them now I guess.
That should tell you that their desire to serve al Maliki's cause was weak.

[Clocker]

That should tell you that their desire to serve al Maliki's cause was weak.

I suspect that most of those that enlisted in the Iraq army did so because it was a soft and secure job at a time when the country was an economic mess after the fall of Saddam. Decent pay with 3 hots and a cot. Getting shot at wasn't part of the deal.

[Native Texan III]

I suspect that most of those that enlisted in the Iraq army did so because it was a soft and secure job at a time when the country was an economic mess after the fall of Saddam. Decent pay with 3 hots and a cot. Getting shot at wasn't part of the deal.

Also soldiers loyal to Iraq do not want to kill their own countrymen whatever sect they belong to. The troops stayed and fought until their ammunition ran out then suffered mass execution but their officers fled. In 6 months US could prepare and borrow the funds for an invasion force to retake Iraq but what of Iraq will be left by then - who do you kill by aircraft attacks and drones with zero ground intelligence Isis, Sunnis, Shiites, Iranians, hostages, women and children? Jordan a sectarian hotchpotch is the next target to fall and then on into Israel (the wound that never heals). US major ally Saudi is funding Sunni Isis to attack Shiites Syria and Iran.

In short, there is now no effective military action US or UK can take to rapidly solve the deepening crisis.
There is no credible Arab peace keeping force.

[fast4522]

You leftys take a good look at the new face of evil, a product of current policy.

[Greyfox]

Also soldiers loyal to Iraq do not want to kill their own countrymen whatever sect they belong to. .

Iraq was an "artificially created" country put together by Winston Churchill and his associates in Great Britain in 1920.
Those country makers paid no attention to ethnic and language differences between the tribes.
Hence their allegiance to Iraq is nowhere near as strong as the peoples of England, France, and America to their nations and flags.
Their loyalty to "Iraq" is weaker than their loyalty to their tribes and sects.
For the most part though, what they have in common is the fact that these are different sects of Muslims fighting one another.
Except neither of these sects have much use for one another, albeit they hate Christians and Jews worse.