Total Posts:15|Showing Posts:1-15
Jump to topic:

Iraq Preparing to Attempt Retaking Ramadi

1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,107
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/2/2015 7:02:20 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
An Iraqi security official of Anbar told BBC that their army was preparing to retake the major city of Ramadi in the coming days - saying 3,000 soldiers had completed basic training just outside of the city for the attack, and that Iran had given them six rocket launchers to defend against suicide vehicles.

If anything has been shown in the past few days in Anbar, this will be a total failure on the Iraqi end.

ISIS has controlled much of the province for about a year now, and it is their stronghold. Attempts to retake the region have been failures, for the most part. In the past few days, ISIS brushed off Iraqi bombardment in Falluja. Falluja, also, is the epitome of US failure in the long run in Iraq - after two of the most major battles of the war were fought there, and nothing has changed. Iraqis bombed and shelled the city - and seemed to have taken the example the US set in causing collateral damage - reports from earlier today said that 19 were dead and 76 injured because of them. The Iraqis also have been having set backs due to ambushes, suicide bombings, and even sandstorms

ISIS has been showing how much ground attacks designed to retake Falluja have been futile. They have been receiving guns, ammunition, cargo trucks, fuel tankers, humvees, explosives, US made MRAP vehicles, and tanks because of them. This was shown in a video of a battle in Karmah, which is just east of Falluja.

So if anything can be learned, the offensive on Ramadi will, ultimately, be a failure. And, ISIS' victory will help them in the long run.

I'm skeptical of the oft-quoted statement from US officials that they are currently winning the fight against ISIS.
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2015 1:36:28 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/2/2015 7:02:20 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
An Iraqi security official of Anbar told BBC that their army was preparing to retake the major city of Ramadi in the coming days - saying 3,000 soldiers had completed basic training just outside of the city for the attack, and that Iran had given them six rocket launchers to defend against suicide vehicles.

If anything has been shown in the past few days in Anbar, this will be a total failure on the Iraqi end.

ISIS has controlled much of the province for about a year now, and it is their stronghold. Attempts to retake the region have been failures, for the most part. In the past few days, ISIS brushed off Iraqi bombardment in Falluja. Falluja, also, is the epitome of US failure in the long run in Iraq - after two of the most major battles of the war were fought there, and nothing has changed. Iraqis bombed and shelled the city - and seemed to have taken the example the US set in causing collateral damage - reports from earlier today said that 19 were dead and 76 injured because of them. The Iraqis also have been having set backs due to ambushes, suicide bombings, and even sandstorms

ISIS has been showing how much ground attacks designed to retake Falluja have been futile. They have been receiving guns, ammunition, cargo trucks, fuel tankers, humvees, explosives, US made MRAP vehicles, and tanks because of them. This was shown in a video of a battle in Karmah, which is just east of Falluja.

So if anything can be learned, the offensive on Ramadi will, ultimately, be a failure. And, ISIS' victory will help them in the long run.

I don't know if I agree with the assessment completely, but if the Iraqi forces try to retake Ramadi, I agree it will be a hard fought battle, because ISIS is both dedicated and heavily reinforced with munitions and equipment. If anything I think it'll end up as a stalemate -- ISIS will probably try again to recapture Ramadi if they happen to lose it.

I'm skeptical of the oft-quoted statement from US officials that they are currently winning the fight against ISIS.

I agree with you here.
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,086
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2015 2:00:30 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
In Iraq the ISIL is losing overall. Syria, on the other hand, is a different story.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,107
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2015 2:28:08 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/3/2015 2:00:30 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
In Iraq the ISIL is losing overall. Syria, on the other hand, is a different story.

They're not really losing at all. Whenever an advance is made, ISIS makes one to match it. And you can say that they've lost 25% of their territory, but that is 1: exaggerated - they haven't been driven out, and 2: a good portion of the land they lost is of little use to them, so they've moved on to bigger things.
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,107
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2015 2:35:16 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
A US official claimed today that 10,000 ISIS fighters have been killed by the US-led coalition in the past nine months, but that has been offset and then some by recruitment - if that's even true, which it probably isn't. That figure doesn't matter, and they're just as strong as ever, if not more.

If they think they're making a difference, they're dead wrong.

Like, they just took control of a dam outside of Ramadi to block off water to two towns, to kill people off by thirst and then to take control of it.

In Anbar, they are untouched. In other areas they are more touchable, but they are not rapidly losing anything. For every piece of equipment the US claims to have destroyed, ISIS claims more. It's really just a lethal circular game of madness that has a really high collateral damage count.
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,107
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2015 2:37:06 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
ISIS is literally waging genocide against the Christians and Shiites in Iraq, and to make matters worse the Iraqi army is indiscriminately shelling cities - which has had more effects on the civilian population count than the ISIS soldier count.
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,107
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2015 2:46:22 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/3/2015 2:35:16 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
A US official claimed today that 10,000 ISIS fighters have been killed by the US-led coalition in the past nine months, but that has been offset and then some by recruitment - if that's even true, which it probably isn't. That figure doesn't matter, and they're just as strong as ever, if not more.

As many as 50,000 people were fighting with ISIS as of August last year, according to the Iraqi government's leading ISIS expert.

They're creeping up more and more on Baghdad and Aleppo, and god help us if they make it into Kurdish territory at any point. A much better trained group, the Kurdish Peshmurga - which is perhaps the most formidable military force in Iraq, fled from ISIS several months ago because they were outnumbered, outgunned, and less equipped. ISIS has made gains in all of those areas since.
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,107
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2015 2:47:44 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/3/2015 2:46:22 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 6/3/2015 2:35:16 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
A US official claimed today that 10,000 ISIS fighters have been killed by the US-led coalition in the past nine months, but that has been offset and then some by recruitment - if that's even true, which it probably isn't. That figure doesn't matter, and they're just as strong as ever, if not more.

As many as 50,000 people were fighting with ISIS as of August last year, according to the Iraqi government's leading ISIS expert.

They're creeping up more and more on Baghdad and Aleppo, and god help us if they make it into Kurdish territory at any point. A much better trained group, the Kurdish Peshmurga - which is perhaps the most formidable military force in Iraq, fled from ISIS several months ago because they were outnumbered, outgunned, and less equipped. ISIS has made gains in all of those areas since.

Of course, the Peshmurga is a larger group as a whole, but ISIS has probably closed that gap since somewhat, no matter how many people the US claims to have killed.
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,086
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2015 3:10:44 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I do admit that much of this bloodshed would be avoided had Obama simply put troops back in Iraq to fight the Islamic State.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,107
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2015 3:12:29 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/3/2015 3:10:44 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
I do admit that much of this bloodshed would be avoided had Obama simply put troops back in Iraq to fight the Islamic State.

Unfortunately, due to the events that transpired from the years 2003 and 2011, things are a bit more complicated than that.
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,086
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2015 3:22:32 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/3/2015 3:12:29 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 6/3/2015 3:10:44 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
I do admit that much of this bloodshed would be avoided had Obama simply put troops back in Iraq to fight the Islamic State.

Unfortunately, due to the events that transpired from the years 2003 and 2011, things are a bit more complicated than that.

It really isn't. Terrorists, while destructive, have not been successful in seizing huge pieces of Iraqi territory while the U.S. had tons of troops there.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,107
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2015 3:30:26 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/3/2015 3:22:32 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 6/3/2015 3:12:29 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 6/3/2015 3:10:44 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
I do admit that much of this bloodshed would be avoided had Obama simply put troops back in Iraq to fight the Islamic State.

Unfortunately, due to the events that transpired from the years 2003 and 2011, things are a bit more complicated than that.

It really isn't. Terrorists, while destructive, have not been successful in seizing huge pieces of Iraqi territory while the U.S. had tons of troops there.

Yeah, good luck trying to go about the plan of getting in and getting out again. That always happens.

If anything, we shouldn't have armed the Iraqi Army. That's why ISIS is what it is today.
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,086
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2015 3:37:08 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/3/2015 3:30:26 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 6/3/2015 3:22:32 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 6/3/2015 3:12:29 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 6/3/2015 3:10:44 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
I do admit that much of this bloodshed would be avoided had Obama simply put troops back in Iraq to fight the Islamic State.

Unfortunately, due to the events that transpired from the years 2003 and 2011, things are a bit more complicated than that.

It really isn't. Terrorists, while destructive, have not been successful in seizing huge pieces of Iraqi territory while the U.S. had tons of troops there.

Yeah, good luck trying to go about the plan of getting in and getting out again. That always happens.

I really don't see why it'd be too difficult. Troops go in, they stay for about 9 months, and then they leave, bringing all their equipment back with them.

If anything, we shouldn't have armed the Iraqi Army. That's why ISIS is what it is today.

But if not, wouldn't the Iraqi Government be even more vulnerable to the ISIL?
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,107
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2015 3:45:05 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/3/2015 3:37:08 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 6/3/2015 3:30:26 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 6/3/2015 3:22:32 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 6/3/2015 3:12:29 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 6/3/2015 3:10:44 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
I do admit that much of this bloodshed would be avoided had Obama simply put troops back in Iraq to fight the Islamic State.

Unfortunately, due to the events that transpired from the years 2003 and 2011, things are a bit more complicated than that.

It really isn't. Terrorists, while destructive, have not been successful in seizing huge pieces of Iraqi territory while the U.S. had tons of troops there.

Yeah, good luck trying to go about the plan of getting in and getting out again. That always happens.

I really don't see why it'd be too difficult. Troops go in, they stay for about 9 months, and then they leave, bringing all their equipment back with them.

It's still not that simple.

If anything, we shouldn't have armed the Iraqi Army. That's why ISIS is what it is today.

But if not, wouldn't the Iraqi Government be even more vulnerable to the ISIL?

Arm the Kurds then. They don't collapse at a single flick, and they're more trustworthy. They're also the only force from Iraq that can match and/or defeat ISIS in battle.
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King