What's new

Iraqi soldiers, police drop weapons, flee posts in portions of Mosul

You know what I understand? I understand that it is important to give people what they want, if they want to be autonomous then so be it. So long as they work for a united Iraq.

Just leave them alone, i say. They should settle their score with each other. Kill each other, exhaust from warring with each other. Then make a peace between themselves.
 
.
And if you somehow believe that it is because they are fearless, you would be wrong. At the end of the day, they know that they will have the US Aerial assets and US Navy's precise artillery fire covering their ***. I am pretty sure the Iraqi soldiers would have stood their ground too if they believed in their situation.

They had all that and still ditched their weapons.
 
.
They had all that and still ditched their weapons.

It's all about belief. Iraqi soldiers probably did not have enough faith in the outcome of the situation. And it is not like the Americans haven't been known to retreat.
 
.
haha well what the ....... Inferior equiped SAA is far better and superior
they dont even have latest equipment like the Iraq army and they are fighting well
 
.
"Some police took off their uniforms, dropped their weapons and ran, according to the journalist."

I guess taking a bullet in the chest, is a concept alien to them!

I have been thinking about the fizzling away of muslim armies against these insurgent groups. So far all I can understood is that one needs a very strong narrative to take a bullet. Fighting in the name of nationhood is still alien to islamic world (except maybe turkey due to deep rooted secularization of the society). The reason why pakistan's army or for that matter iran and syria's (at present) army keep fighting the opposing religious forces/insurgents/kharjis despite heavy losses is the religious narrative with which they themselves are trained.
Most of the post-caliphate muslim countries havent been tested in a war especially when the opposing party is holding the banner of islam. And whenever this happens, the whole army vanishes in thin air either by running away or joining the other side. this happened in Libya and is now happening in Iraq and will tomorrow happen in Afghanistan (hopefully not). The only way Iraq could fight back is if the Shia population takes up arm in their religious zeal of defending their sacred places.
 
.
It's all about belief. Iraqi soldiers probably did not have enough faith in the outcome of the situation. And it is not like the Americans haven't been known to retreat.
You are absolutely right about that! I can tell you from personal experience that faith matters a lot in combat. Sometimes, it's the only thing that keeps you going.
 
.
...USA is a shitty country, and will continue to be a shitty country until and unless they return the daughter of Pakistan, Dr Aafia Siddique, and if anyone finds this signature offensive, you can shove it up your rear end.

A Pakistani calling the U.S. a 'shitty country'. How funny is that ? And Siddique is a shitty terrorist who is going to rot in prison as some big bull-dikes bitch.:usflag:
 
.
A Pakistani calling the U.S. a 'shitty country'. How funny is that ? And Siddique is a shitty terrorist who is going to rot in prison as some big bull-dikes bitch.:usflag:
Just what a shitty citizen would say
 
. .
Dempsey: Iraq Has Requested US Airstrikes
Jun. 18, 2014
By MARCUS WEISGERBER

bilde

Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Iraq is seeking US airstrikes to battle the growing violence led by a militant Islamic organization. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

WASHINGTONThe Iraqi government has requested US military airstrikes to help combat widespread violence in Iraq, led by the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), the top American general told Congress Wednesday.

Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, confirmed the request during a Senate Appropriations Defense subcommittee hearing when being questioned by Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.

“We have a request from the Iraqi government for airpower,” Dempsey said.

Earlier Wednesday morning, Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James said the Air Force would be ready to conduct air strikes and support missions in Iraq if directed by President Barack Obama.

“I’m very confident that if the order comes down ... our Air Force would be ready,” James told the Defense Writers Group at a breakfast in Washington.

Not specifically speaking about Iraq, James said the Air Force could be ready within hours to conduct missions.

The Air Force could bring numerous “capabilities” if requested for a variety of missions in Iraq, including airlift, reconnaissance, strike, aerial refueling, and command and control, she said.

The Pentagon has basing arrangements with numerous countries throughout the Middle East, including Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. Dozens of Air Force aircraft, including F-15E, F-16 and F-22 fighters; KC-135 tankers; A-10 strike aircraft; B-1B bombers; C-17 and C-130 transports; and an array of unmanned aircraft are already based or rotating though the region.

“We have a variety of assets already over there in the regular order and of course we have others that could be moved within a matter of a fairly short period of time should that be asked of us,” James said.

Additional assets could be brought into the Middle East, if necessary, she said.

The Obama administration is considering a number of options to combat ISIL, which has reportedly taken control of a number of cities throughout the country.

“The Air Force is fully engaged in the planning efforts and we are standing by with our sister services,” James said, noting she is not part of the administration’s contingency planning team.

Dempsey: Iraq Has Requested US Airstrikes | Defense News | defensenews.com
 
.
Fighting in the name of nationhood is still alien to islamic world (except maybe turkey due to deep rooted secularization of the society).

Let me evaluate.

1-) We are very very very nationalistic people. We would choose Turkic blood to our so-called muslim brothers anyday.
2-) Secularism has it's role in it.
3-) We had the last Caliphate, everyone knows how it was ended. So nobody should expect any Ummah, Jihad, Muslim Brotherhood, etc... from us.
 
.
Special Forces Face Tough Test Fixing Iraqi Army
Jun 20, 2014 by Matthew Cox
iraq_training-ts300.jpg


President Obama's order to rush 300 Special Forces to Iraq may slow the hemorrhaging within Iraq's military, but it's unlikely to heal the deep wounds festering inside most Iraqi units, said defense analysts and U.S. troops who have trained Iraqi units.

The June 19 announcement is part of the administration's small-scale military response to militants from the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria storming through northern Iraq towns and threatening to take Baghdad.

The deployment of 300 Special Forces soldiers follows an earlier announcement by Obama of plans to deploy 275 Marines and soldiers to reinforce the U.S. embassy.

Once on the ground, Special Forces will assess the state of the deteriorating Iraqi forces and try to help Iraqi units regain the form U.S. troops saw before U.S. combat troops left Iraq. This will be no small feat, military experts maintain.

ISIS militants may be a formidable threat, but the real enemy of the Iraq army has been Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, according to Anthony Cordesman, an analyst for the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a think tank in Washington D.C.

For years, the Shiite leader has cultivated an anti-Sunni atmosphere in his government and in the ranks of the military and police, Cordesman wrotte in a paper entitled "Shaping Iraq's Security Forces."

Maliki has "corrupted the security forces, using promotions and interim appointments for his own political advantage, and let the army and police steadily deteriorate," Cordesman wrote. "Positions and promotions were for sale, desertions increased and there were more and more ghost soldiers -- men listed as present but not actually there. The US-trained Iraqi Security Forces lost unity, morale, leadership, and effectiveness. Good officers left or were pushed out or sidelined. Unit cohesion dropped steadily."

Iraqi Army units folded against ISIS forces in battles in predominant Sunni areas like Mosul and Tikrit.

"The units that were facing the ISIS, I would be willing to bet that they were mixed Sunni/Shia and if you are Sunni being asked to fight other Sunni in a Sunni area, the motivation to fight is probably a lot less," according to Marine Corps Col. Scott Campbell, who is doing a one-year fellowship at the Council on Foreign Relations.

Campbell, who has served nearly 28 years as a Marine infantry officer, served two tours in Iraq. He said there are few things that can damage the cohesiveness of a military unit more than the deep religious divides such as those that exist between Sunni and Shia.

"If it's not handled with superb leadership, that can be devastating to a unit," Campbell said. "We have been gone a couple of years. They have recruited new guys and we don't know how well the new guys were trained. We don't know if they are getting paid on time. We don't know if there communications systems are working or their logistics. I'm willing to bet they didn't have fire support or aviation support."

"So anyone of those wouldn't necessarily be devastating," Campbell said. "But if you accumulate all these things together with the Sunni-Shia problem, you can see how the army may not perform well."

Cordesman praised Obama's decision to deploy Special Forces to Iraq, calling it a key first step in dealing with the crisis.

"It gives the United States the kind of direct contact with Iraqi forces that allows them to judge their strengths and weaknesses, and act as a check on sectarian abuses, as well as help funnel U.S. aid to the units that will use it against [ISIS] and other extremist forces, rather than encourage sectarian attacks and civil war," Cordesman wrote in a statement reacting to the June 19 announcement.

Special Forces teams could also be tasked with directing airstrikes, or advising the Iraqis on how to do it, senior administration officials say.
Sending in Special Forces will also "establish the expert presence to make any future U.S. use of airpower more effective," Cordesman said.

"With luck, it will also open up a path to both rebuilding the force Maliki did so much to turn into a tool of his own power, corrupt, and push into sectarian abuses, and open up a path to bring moderate Sunnis back into the Iraqi Army."

Special Forces Face Tough Test Fixing Iraqi Army | Military.com
 
.
Here's Who Is In Control Of Iraq's Major Cities And Towns
by HOWARD KOPLOWITZ, JUN. 20, 2014

As an al-Qaida offshoot makes advances in Iraq and government forces push back against the militants to reassert control over cities, the flurry of fighting in the country has made it difficult for the casual observer to discern who is in control of a particular area or region.

The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, or ISIS, and the Kurdish peshmerga force between them now control large swathes of the country's north and northeast. The Institute for the Study of War, or ISW, a non-profit, public policy research organization, has produced this “Control of Terrain in Iraq” map dated Thursday that distinctly marks areas based on who was controlling them on that day.



control-zone-map%20copy.jpg


In addition to the map, Agence France-Presse has an update on the status of seven key cities in Iraq as of Friday morning:

Mosul:
Iraq's second-biggest city was the first to fall in the swift Sunni militant offensive. Capital of Nineveh province, Mosul is held by insurgents led by the [ISIS] jihadist group. Hundreds of thousands of residents have fled the city of two million. There are conflicting reports about those who stayed behind, with some claiming they are chafing under strict Islamic law imposed by the jihadists while others say they have welcomed the militants.

Tikrit:
The second provincial capital captured after Mosul and hometown of executed dictator Saddam Hussein. Militants seized the city in Salaheddin province and freed hundreds of prisoners as they pushed their advance south. Iraqi forces launched air strikes targeting militants holed up in a palace compound where Saddam once received foreign guests.

Baquba:
Militants briefly controlled three areas of Baquba, the confessionally-mixed capital of restive Diyala province, just 35 miles north of Baghdad, but were repelled by security forces. During the violence, 44 prisoners in a police station were killed, but accounts conflict over who was responsible for the deaths.

Baiji:
After protracted clashes with militants, who held parts of Iraq's biggest oil refinery near Baiji, north of Baghdad in Salaheddin province, security forces wrested back full control of the facility on Thursday. The crisis, however, has further spooked international oil traders who are keeping a close eye on the militant offensive and its potential impact on Iraq's vast crude exports.

Kirkuk:
The ethnically mixed oil city of Kirkuk is the capital of the eponymous northern province. It has changed hands in the course of the offensive. Forces from autonomous the Kurdish region took control of it after federal troops quit the area. The city is the heart of a swathe of disputed territory which the Kurds have long wanted to incorporate into their region, over Baghdad's strong objections.

Samarra:
Home to the revered Shiite Al-Askari shrine, whose 2006 bombing sparked a bloody Sunni-Shiite sectarian war, Samarra has been attacked by militants but did not fall. Baghdad has sent reinforcements to the city, and said it aims to use it as a launchpad for operations to retake areas farther north.

Baghdad:
Though militants have not been able to encroach on Baghdad, the mood in the capital has been tense. Security forces have taken on an increased presence, while Shiite militias are openly operating. Counter-terrorism forces were recently deployed to west Baghdad because of fears of "terrorist sleeper cells". A long-held overnight curfew on movement in the capital has been extended in some areas.


http://www.businessinsider.com/who-is-in-control-of-iraqs-major-cities-and-towns-2014-6?nr_email_referer=1&utm_source=Triggermail&utm_medium=email&utm_term=Business Insider Select&utm_campaign=BI Select (Wednesday Friday) 2014-06-20&utm_content=emailshare
 
.
Is ISIL really Sunni?
Thursday, June 19th, 2014 byKevin Barrett

eeee-1-320x213.jpg


The Western media describes ISIL – the ultra-extremist terrorists destabilizing Iraq and Syria – as “Sunni militants.”

Headlines read: “Sunni Islamist Militants Seize Mosul.” “Sunni militants capture northern Iraqi town.” “Iraq Army Tries to Roll Back Sunni Militants’ Advance.”

The corporate media casts the fighting in Iraq as a Sunni vs. Shia conflict. The Sunni side, according to these reports, is led by ISIL – a group that was expelled from al-Qaeda for being too extreme.

But is ISIL really Sunni?

Many experts say “no.” Some question whether ISIL has a right to call itself an Islamic group at all.

In an interview with Truth Jihad Radio, Islamic scholar Dr. John Andrew Morrow (Ilyas Abd al-‘Alim Islam) questioned ISIL’s Islamic credentials: “A lot of so-called jihad (such as ISIL’s) is not rooted in Islam. Especially if you look at who’s funding it, who’s supporting it, who’s behind it. Western powers have a long history of using jihadists and Islamists to further their own imperial ambitions. In terms of the foot-soldiers, they may think they are fighting for Islam. But if you look closer, you find they’re furthering the cause of the enemy.”

Dr. Morrow pointed out that much of ISIL’s behavior is patently un-Islamic. He said that the ISIL terrorists love to film themselves committing war crimes that are forbidden by Islam: “They are very proud to commit atrocities. They film it. They upload it to the internet. They have their own websites.”

Dr. Morrow commented on the notorious video showing a Takfiri terrorist eating a dead soldier’s liver: “This is what Hind (an enemy of the Muslims) did. You’re not following the sahaba, you’re not following the Prophet. You’re following the polytheists who were fighting the Prophet when you start cannibalizing corpses. And there was another video of a poor Muslim sister who was strangled to death. I mean, who goes around strangling women to cries of Allahu akbar?”

Continuing the habit of vaunting their un-Islamic atrocities, ISIL terrorists recently posted internet videos showing themselves murdering 1,700 captured Iraqi army soldiers. They have also reportedly killed dozens of Sunni imams who refuse to swear allegiance to ISIL. And they are killing Shia Muslims indiscriminately.

If these terrorists are Sunni Muslims, why are they systematically violating the tenets of Sunni Islam?

In fact, ISIL appears to be far outside of Sunni Islam. The kind of “Islam” espoused by the ISIL Takfiris is an extreme version of the Salafi-Wahhabi school of thought. These people reject the five major Islamic madhhabs (schools of thought) including the four Sunni ones. If you reject all four Sunni madhhabs, how can you call yourself Sunni?

In fact, the extreme Salafi-Wahhabis, including the ultra-extreme ISIL, have broken with mainstream Islam as it has existed for fourteen centuries. By jettisoning the established Islamic madhhabs, and stepping outside of Islam as it has always been understood, they have entered a very dangerous territory in which they feel they can just make up the rules as they go along. So they make up such rules as: “It is okay to rape Christian and Shia women. It is okay to eat the internal organs of dead enemies. It is okay to marry ‘jihad brides’ for sex and divorce them after 30 minutes. It is okay to crucify Christian holy men. It is okay to strangle women to death. It is okay to mass-murder civilians. It is okay to mass-execute prisoners of war.”

No Sunni in history would recognize this as Sunni Islam.

Zaid Hamid, a Sunni Muslim defense analyst from Pakistan,says ISIS and related terrorist groups are not Sunnis, but Kharajite hereticsserving an imperial anti-Islamic agenda. (The Kharajites were an ultra-radical group that rejected early versions of both Sunni and Shia Islam and stepped outside of the Islamic community – hence their name, which means “those who step outside.”) Hamid argues that the ultra-radical groups destabilizing Pakistan, Syria and Iraq have indeed stepped outside of Islam, and are making war on Islam and Muslims on behalf of Zionism and imperialism.

But isn’t it true that many Sunni Muslims in Iraq support ISIL?

Yes and no. It is true that some ordinary Iraqis from Sunni backgrounds have joined ISIL’s insurrection in Iraq. But these are mainly pro-Saddam revanchists, not religiously-oriented Sunni Muslims. Saddam Hussein, of course, was a radical secularist whose idols were Stalin and Hitler. Saddam’s Ba’ath party was anti-religious and pro-secularist; Saddam’s hatred of the Islamic Awakening was so extreme that he launched a war on the Ayatollah Khomeini’s new Islamic Republic in hopes of preventing the rebirth of Islam. So to call the Saddam Hussein supporters who are joining with ISIL “Sunnis” is misleading. Saddam’s forces, like ISIL, are opposed to Islam in both its traditional Sunni and Shia forms.

The full name of Sunnism is “the people of the Tradition of the Prophet and the consensus of the community” (ahl as-sunnah wa l-jamaʻah). Eating the livers of dead enemies is not part of the Tradition of the Prophet – it is the tradition of the enemies of the Prophet. And such behavior is obviously not approved by the consensus of the Muslim community.

The Tradition of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) is one of inclusion, tolerance, mutual respect, and the forging of alliances between people of different tribes and religions. The original Muslim community, whose founding document is the Constitution of Medina, consisted of Christians, Jews and Muslims living together and sharing power and obligations on an equitable basis.

The real Sunna (Tradition) holds to reason and persuasion, and uses violence only as a last resort. The Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) and his Family and Companions preached peacefully for 12 years, despite atrocious persecution, before God finally authorized them to fight back in self-defense.

The real Tradition of the Prophet respects knowledge so much that “the ink of the scholar is more precious than the blood of the martyr.” And the consensus of the Islamic community is that the work of 14 centuries worth of Islamic scholarship – the five major Islamic madhhabs, both the four Sunni madhhabs and the Shia Ja’fari madhhab – collectively represents mainstream Islam. All Sunni Muslims have tremendous respect for Imam Ja’far al-Sadiq, who founded the main Shia madhhab. The terrorists who reject this tremendous scholarly achievement, and want to kill everyone who disagrees with them, are far outside of normative Sunni Islam.

So why does the Western mainstream media insist on calling anti-Sunni, anti-Shia groups like ISIL “Sunni”?

Perhaps the problem is laziness. Since ISIL has a special hatred for Shia Muslims, the simplest way to portray them is to paint the situation as an alleged Sunni vs. Shia conflict. By defaulting to this lowest-common-denominator description, the media absolves itself from the duty of explaining, in detail, what is actually going on.

But it is also possible that the corporate media is intentionally misreporting the situation. The extreme-Zionist neoconservatives launched the US invasion of Iraq in order to break up that country, and the Middle East as a whole, by inciting ethnic and sectarian strife. The “Sunni vs. Shia” meme was created and spread by the Occupiers through a wave of false-flag terrorism. Perhaps the media is trumpeting that meme in order to propagate it.

In any case, the world’s Sunni Muslims are being slandered every time the media calls ISIL “Sunni.” It is time for Sunnis to reject this mischaracterization of their religion. Perhaps Sunni Muslims should file a class action lawsuit against the media outlets that are spreading this calumny.

Is ISIL really Sunni? | Veterans Today
 
.
I have been thinking about the fizzling away of muslim armies against these insurgent groups. So far all I can understood is that one needs a very strong narrative to take a bullet. Fighting in the name of nationhood is still alien to islamic world (except maybe turkey due to deep rooted secularization of the society). The reason why pakistan's army or for that matter iran and syria's (at present) army keep fighting the opposing religious forces/insurgents/kharjis despite heavy losses is the religious narrative with which they themselves are trained.
Most of the post-caliphate muslim countries havent been tested in a war especially when the opposing party is holding the banner of islam. And whenever this happens, the whole army vanishes in thin air either by running away or joining the other side. this happened in Libya and is now happening in Iraq and will tomorrow happen in Afghanistan (hopefully not). The only way Iraq could fight back is if the Shia population takes up arm in their religious zeal of defending their sacred places.
agreed. I have the feeling many muslims first put emphasis on being muslim. This is fine if they are personally ok with that, but unfortunately some people care a lot about their own sect (be it sunni or shia etc.), this cannot be good. Iraq seems to have failed to forge a strong national identity. It seems being Iraqi means not so much since Kurds, Shia and Sunni are now basically after their own interest. Even Maliki himself seems to care about shia more than than anything. I also read that some Iraqi sunni groups even support ISIL. What about Pakistan? could you explain whether Pakistani people in general care more about being Pakistani or more caring about their religion (sect)?
 
.

Latest posts

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom