U.S. plans for Iraq?

Idris
Idris Posts: 2,317
edited February 2012 in A Moving Train
As American troops have left Iraq. One of the worlds most deadliest terrorist organizations remains in the country, as strong as ever and with plans to 'maintain a large clandestine presence in Iraq'. (and Afghanistan)
-

CIA digs in as Americans withdraw from Iraq, Afghanistan

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/cia-digs-in-as-americans-withdraw-from-iraq-afghanistan/2012/02/07/gIQAFNJTxQ_story.html

Part of a plan by the Obama administration to rely on a combination of spies and Special Operations forces to protect U.S. interests in the two longtime war zones, U.S. officials said.

The withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq in December has moved the CIA’s emphasis there toward more traditional espionage — monitoring developments in the increasingly antagonistic government, seeking to suppress al-Qaeda’s affiliate in the country and countering the influence of Iran.

U.S. officials said that the CIA’s stations in Kabul and Baghdad will probably remain the agency’s largest overseas outposts for years, even if they shrink from record staffing levels set at the height of American efforts in those nations to fend off insurgencies and install capable governments. ("capable" here means 'puppet')
-
The hegemony continues.

and the US troops? 'Security contractors' still replacing them?


US wants to reduce the size of the Mega Embassy in Iraq.
-

State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland declined comment on the article's specifics but confirmed that the United States was looking to "right-size" the enormous embassy in Baghdad.

"I think what we have here is an embassy structure that was built for a different time and that relied a lot on extensive contracting for a whole range of reasons, some of them historic, some of them security-related," Nuland told reporters.

"Our judgment now is that we can adapt that for today's Iraq, do our diplomatic business just as well and just as rigorously, but far more efficiently," she said. (I like that, "do our diplomatic business")
-
U.S. Planning to Slash Iraq Embassy Staff by Half

The expansive diplomatic operation and the $750 million embassy building, the largest of its kind in the world, were billed as necessary to nurture a postwar Iraq on its shaky path to democracy and establish normal relations between two countries linked by blood and mutual suspicion.

But the Americans have been frustrated by what they see as Iraqi obstructionism and are now largely confined to the embassy because of security concerns, unable to interact enough with ordinary Iraqis to justify the $6 billion annual price tag.

To make the cuts, he said the embassy was “hiring Iraqi staff and sourcing more goods and services to the local economy.”

After the American troops departed in December, life became more difficult for the thousands of diplomats and contractors left behind. Convoys of food that had been escorted by the United States military from Kuwait were delayed at border crossings as Iraqis demanded documentation that the Americans were unaccustomed to providing.

Within days, the salad bar at the embassy dining hall ran low. Sometimes there was no sugar or Splenda for coffee. On chicken-wing night, wings were rationed at six per person. (6 wings? :( I'm sorry, the war is bad, but 6 wings on 'wing night'?...That's just wrong.

I'm glad the NY Times article brought to light these terrible ordeals the Military Contractors and diplomats are having to go through.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/08/world/middleeast/united-states-planning-to-slash-iraq-embassy-staff-by-half.html?src=mv&ref=world
Post edited by Unknown User on
«13

Comments

  • "Security Contractors" ... pfft. It might not actually "be" our troops but its private "troops" hired and contracted by the government.... another tactful word for the "hessions" of War Incorporated. Its like a half truth. No, our troops are not in a war we just hired other people to do our work so legally we can say its not our "troops" ...aye but it is.


    LOL wing night. OMFG. These people are worried about wing night, are you serious?
  • they just cut the staff by 50% at the embassy.... to... wait for it...... EIGHT FREAKIN' THOUSAND.

    WTF? 16,000 people at a single fucking embassy? 6 BILLION dollars?!

    the amazing thing is; Iraq is worse off now than it was in 2002. Yeah, Hussein was a ruthless dictator but there weren't hundreds of people killed or kidnapped by terrorists every month. what a cruel joke. I guess you could argue it is better, but only marginally, and it is much less stable and the economy is worse.

    which place will we go next to kill thousands of our 20 year old boys? where will we spend billions (trillions?)? I think Syria will be the pre-show to the main event which is Iran.
    Everything not forbidden is compulsory and eveything not compulsory is forbidden. You are free... free to do what the government says you can do.
  • gimmesometruth27
    gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 24,875
    6 wings on wing night....

    can that be considered a crime against humanity?





    forgive me for not feeling sorry for the people at this embassy...
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • Cosmo
    Cosmo Posts: 12,225
    What if the soverign Iraqi government decided to contract with the Russian 'Blackwater' to provide security for its government officials, instead of American and British contractors?
    Can the Iraqis seek the aide of their Shi'ite bretheren in Iran to help secure and train their forces?
    They ARE a democracy now... aren't they? Don't they get the right to choose?
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
  • Cosmo wrote:
    What if the soverign Iraqi government decided to contract with the Russian 'Blackwater' to provide security for its government officials, instead of American and British contractors?
    Can the Iraqis seek the aide of their Shi'ite bretheren in Iran to help secure and train their forces?
    They ARE a democracy now... aren't they? Don't they get the right to choose?

    not if they want our weapons.
    Everything not forbidden is compulsory and eveything not compulsory is forbidden. You are free... free to do what the government says you can do.
  • Cosmo wrote:
    What if the soverign Iraqi government decided to contract with the Russian 'Blackwater' to provide security for its government officials, instead of American and British contractors?
    Can the Iraqis seek the aide of their Shi'ite bretheren in Iran to help secure and train their forces?
    They ARE a democracy now... aren't they? Don't they get the right to choose?


    Being a democracy doesn't guarantee security. Being a stable democracy with a strong military might...

    Very naive to say- "Aren't they a democracy, don't they get to choose?"

    Iran is all over this- Iran is directly killing American GI's in Afghan and Iraq- and the US is already at war w/ Iran.

    The military knows it. The President knows it. Apparently, the Train is oblivious.

    "Can't Iran be contracted to train Iraq's security forces?" :roll: Jesus...
  • Cosmo
    Cosmo Posts: 12,225
    Being a democracy doesn't guarantee security. Being a stable democracy with a strong military might...
    Very naive to say- "Aren't they a democracy, don't they get to choose?"
    Iran is all over this- Iran is directly killing American GI's in Afghan and Iraq- and the US is already at war w/ Iran.
    The military knows it. The President knows it. Apparently, the Train is oblivious.
    "Can't Iran be contracted to train Iraq's security forces?" :roll: Jesus...
    ...
    Why is it your choice, not Iraq's to choose who they want to provide security?
    You seem to know a lot... then, you already know that Iraq and Iran are Shi'ite minorities in a greater Sunni region, right?
    Yet, you do not think it is plausible that the Shi'ite controlled Iraq (that used to be Sunni under Saddam Hussein, who kept the Iranian Shi'ites in check and explains why none of the then moderate Sunni Arab states opted in our little coalition because they liked the fact that Hussein oppressed the Shi'ites and locked down Iran, even though they thought he was an asshole) would want to form a Shi'ite bloc with their Shi'ite brethren in Iran. Shi'ites have been long oppressed in the region. An Iranian military financed by Iraqi oil would make the Shi'ia a big player in the Middle East... instead of a lowly and much dispised minority.
    Why do you believe that is not a probability?
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
  • Drowned Out
    Drowned Out Posts: 6,056

    Iran is all over this- Iran is directly killing American GI's in Afghan and Iraq- and the US is already at war w/ Iran.
    ..
    Really? When?
  • BinauralJam
    BinauralJam Posts: 14,158

    Iran is all over this- Iran is directly killing American GI's in Afghan and Iraq- and the US is already at war w/ Iran.
    ..
    Really? When?


    i checked Fox News, nothing on this :think:

  • Iran is all over this- Iran is directly killing American GI's in Afghan and Iraq- and the US is already at war w/ Iran.
    ..
    Really? When?

    Where: Iraq. Afghan. Inside Iran (see Iranian nuke scientist assasinations-covert. See Stuxnet- cyber war)

    1. Its part of my job. That's how I know.

    2. Its been posted here before.

    3. Research it. GOOGLE: "Iran killing Americans in Iraq". Then try same search w/ Afghan.

    We are already at war. While America votes for the next American Idol, we are covertly engaged with the Iranian military on multiple fronts.

    Iran is in NO WAY, interested in a secure and democratic Iraq. That notion is so incorrect, that there is no way to even describe how false it is. It just is. Everyone involved knows it.

    Not trying to debate or stir shit. This is just the truth.
  • Drowned Out
    Drowned Out Posts: 6,056

    Iran is all over this- Iran is directly killing American GI's in Afghan and Iraq- and the US is already at war w/ Iran.
    ..
    Really? When?

    Where: Iraq. Afghan. Inside Iran (see Iranian nuke scientist assasinations-covert. See Stuxnet- cyber war)

    1. Its part of my job. That's how I know.

    2. Its been posted here before.

    3. Research it. GOOGLE: "Iran killing Americans in Iraq". Then try same search w/ Afghan.

    We are already at war. While America votes for the next American Idol, we are covertly engaged with the Iranian military on multiple fronts.
    .

    I did google it. Found one Admiral stating that "Iran is very directly supporting extremist Shia groups (in Iraq), which are killing our troops.".....nothing about them killing americans directly....Now...the source. A US admiral who is seeking an extension to the deadline of troop withdrawl. I also found a bunch of blogs that read like you might have written them :lol:
    The nuke assassinations have all been Americans/Israelis killing Iranians, not the other way around...right? Stuxnet is Israel and the US engaging in covert tech sabotage....right? This is your proof that Iranians are directly killing Americans?

    So if this proxy war - Iranians arming other countries, constitutes Iranians 'directly killing Americans'....then I guess the US is guilty of killing civilians and contributing to human rights violations in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Egypt, Colombia, Jordan, Bahrain, Oman, Morocco, Yemen,Tunisi, Chad, the Congo, Nigeria, Uganda, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Haiti, and every other country they supply arms to....right?

    Iran gets it's arms from Russia......why aren't you beating your war drums to go after the real source of these weapons?
  • Ok.

    whatever you say...
  • Drowned Out
    Drowned Out Posts: 6,056
    :lol:
  • puremagic
    puremagic Posts: 1,907

    Being a democracy doesn't guarantee security. Being a stable democracy with a strong military might...

    Very naive to say- "Aren't they a democracy, don't they get to choose?"

    ...

    Then a lot of people died unnecessary to achieve a fake, word only form of democracy. A lot of arms, legs and body parts were left in Iraq by people who believed as they were told; we’re fighting to bring the Iraq people democracy. We killed their leader in the name of giving them democracy. Every death given and taken was supposedly behind the Red, White and Blue wave of bringing democracy to the people of Iraq. So, every goddamn tear shed at a funeral was for a lie.

    Iran had nothing, to do with that propaganda, just home grown warmongers.
    SIN EATERS--We take the moral excrement we find in this equation and we bury it down deep inside of us so that the rest of our case can stay pure. That is the job. We are morally indefensible and absolutely necessary.
  • gimmesometruth27
    gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 24,875
    puremagic wrote:

    Being a democracy doesn't guarantee security. Being a stable democracy with a strong military might...

    Very naive to say- "Aren't they a democracy, don't they get to choose?"

    ...

    Then a lot of people died unnecessary to achieve a fake, word only form of democracy. A lot of arms, legs and body parts were left in Iraq by people who believed as they were told; we’re fighting to bring the Iraq people democracy. We killed their leader in the name of giving them democracy. Every death given and taken was supposedly behind the Red, White and Blue wave of bringing democracy to the people of Iraq. So, every goddamn tear shed at a funeral was for a lie.

    Iran had nothing, to do with that propaganda, just home grown warmongers.
    :clap:

    don't forget how they were involved in 9/11 and that saddam and al quaeda were friends, when in reality they were actually enemies....

    what you stated is all true. and it is all going to happen again in iran....


    in the fields the bodies burning....

    as the war machine keeps turning....
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • Cosmo
    Cosmo Posts: 12,225
    Where: Iraq. Afghan. Inside Iran (see Iranian nuke scientist assasinations-covert. See Stuxnet- cyber war)
    1. Its part of my job. That's how I know.
    2. Its been posted here before.
    3. Research it. GOOGLE: "Iran killing Americans in Iraq". Then try same search w/ Afghan.

    We are already at war. While America votes for the next American Idol, we are covertly engaged with the Iranian military on multiple fronts.
    Iran is in NO WAY, interested in a secure and democratic Iraq. That notion is so incorrect, that there is no way to even describe how false it is. It just is. Everyone involved knows it.

    Not trying to debate or stir shit. This is just the truth.
    ...
    The Truth is... Iran is using the American lead 'Spreading of Democracy' to unite with fellow Shi'ites who were an oppressed majority in Iraq for decades. You are in the know... so, you know that one of the holiest site in the Shi'ia sect is the mosque in Najaf, Iraq. Shi'ites seek to make a pilgrimage to this site at least once in their lifetime. Under Hussein, Shi'ite immigration from Iran was limited to something like 300 per year (in which he expelled 300 Shi'ites). With Hussein out of the picture, that quota has been lifted by the now, Shi'ia dominated Iraqi government. Iraq is welcoming Shi'ites ino her borders, making the Shi'ite majority even greater in numbers, compared to their Sunni and Kurdish counterparts (no one gives a shit about the Marsh Arabs... they are basically the Native Americans of Iraq).
    Iran wants a democratic Iraq because it knows that the Shi'ite majority will elect Shi'ite leadership. It is in Iran's best interest to form a Shi'ite bloc in the region, since the Shi'ia are a minority in the Middle East. If anything, it would be in America's (military/current foriegn policy) best interest to have an unstable Iraq so that Iran cannot stake it's claim to the Iraqi oil fields. Ironic, huh?
    But, we should have known better... who would the iraqis trust more? The ones in uniforms and guns from a nation across the sea that knows nothing about its culture, customes, religion or language... or a nation next door that is the same religious sect, speaks the same language, know the same cuture and shares the same customs? Kind of a no-brainer, right?
    Unless you picked the country from across the sea.
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
  • Idris
    Idris Posts: 2,317
    Speaking about funding groups and weapons Let's see how this goes.
    -
    With a decision due within weeks by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, former US four-star generals, intelligence chiefs, governors, and political heavyweights are calling for the US government to take the Mojahedin-e Khalq (MEK/MKO) off the terror list it shares with Al Qaeda and Hezbollah.

    A high-powered array of former top American officials is advocating removal from the US terrorist list of a controversial Iranian opposition group with a long anti-American history.


    http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2011/0808/Iranian-group-s-big-money-push-to-get-off-US-terrorist-list

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People%27s_Mujahedin_of_Iran

    From Wiki-

    During the Iraq war, U.S. troops disarmed the PMOI and posted guards at its bases. The U.S. military also protected and gave logistical support to the MEK as U.S. officials viewed the group as a high value source of intelligence on Iran. The PMOI is credited with revealing Iran's nuclear program in 2003 and alerting Americans to Iranian advancements in nuclear technology.

    The same year that the French police raided the PMOI's properties in France (2003), Tehran attempted to negotiate with Washington. Iranian officials offered to withdraw military backing for Hamas and Hezbollah, and to give open access to their nuclear facilities in return for Western action in disbanding the PMOI, which was revealed by Newsnight, a BBC current affairs program, in 2007.

    The BBC uncovered a letter written after the invasion of Iraq in 2003 where Tehran made this offer The proposition was done in a secret letter to Washington via Switzerland. According to the BBC, the U.S. State Department received the letter from the highest levels of the Iranian government.

    According to Lawrence Wilkerson, former chief of staff of Secretary of State Colin Powell, interviewed by the BBC, the State Department initially considered the offer, but it was ultimately rejected by the office of Vice President Dick Cheney.
    -
  • brianlux
    brianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 43,778
    Oil.
    "It's a sad and beautiful world"
    -Roberto Benigni

  • brianlux wrote:
    Oil.
    :ugeek:
  • brianlux wrote:
    Oil.
    :ugeek:

    zomg!













    :oops:
    ~ Enjoy The Struggle